There have been a few developments in the lawsuit filed by Gavin Grimm, a female who recently graduated from high school and who “identifies as a boy.” Grimm filed a lawsuit in July 2015 to force her school district to allow students to choose whether to use the girls’ bathroom or the boys’ bathroom based on the student’s self-declared “gender identity.” WoLF has filed three amicus briefs in Grimm’s case, including two before the U.S. Supreme Court and one before the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, setting out the radical feminist analysis of sex and gender and defending the rights of women and girls to preserve sex-segregated spaces under Title IX. (See here and here.)

After we filed our briefs in the Supreme Court, the Trump administration issued a policy letter  withdrawing the Obama administration’s policy that was highly favorable to Grimm’s case. Whereas the Obama policy declared that “sex” under Title IX can be superseded by a person’s self-declared “gender identity” — allowing any boy or man in a school or university setting to access spaces, programs, and funding designated for women and girls — Trump’s policy restores the plain meaning of “sex” under Title IX. After the Obama policy was retracted, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the 4th Circuit to reassess Grimm’s arguments.

But Grimm has now graduated, and that raises questions about whether Grimm still has a case to press. In light of these new questions, the Fourth Circuit sent the matter back to the District Court on August 2, to give Grimm and the school district a chance to provide more evidence and arguments about whether Grimm still has a viable case.

On Friday, August 11, Grimm filed an amended complaint, dropping her request for a preliminary injunction but continuing to push for 1) a legal declaration of her rights under Title IX and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, 2) monetary damages against the school as well as reimbursement of her legal fees, and 3) a permanent injunction that would compel the school to allow Grimm and any other alumni of the school to allow cross-sex access to bathrooms based on self-declared “gender identity.” Grimm will have to prove not only that she has a continuing connection to the high school but also that the school board’s policy on bathrooms even applies to alumni — both claims the school district disputes.

Given that this case is a big priority for the ACLU and other NGOs pushing “gender identity” ideology, there’s a good chance the case will go up on appeal once more. WoLF will continue to watch this case closely and evaluate our future options for presenting keeping the radical feminist perspective in the legal debate.