Pittsburg, PA

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.
Tucker Arensberg, P.C.
One PPG Place, Suite 1500
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
(412) 566-1212
(412) 594-5619
Directions to Pittsburgh

Harrisburg, PA

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.
Tucker Arensberg, P.C.
2 Lemoyne Drive, Suite 200
Lemoyne, PA 17043
(717) 234-4121
(717) 232-6802
Directions to Harrisburg

New York, NY

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.
Tucker Arensberg, P.C.
250 Park Avenue, Suite 1508, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10171
(212) 739-7910
(212) 739-9607
Directions to New York

Widget Title

  • People
  • Practice Areas
  • News + Insights
    • News
    • Articles
    • Speaking
  • Office Locations
    • Pittsburgh
    • Harrisburg
    • New York
  • About the Firm
    • Overview
    • Careers
    • Diversity
    • Affiliations
    • Pro Bono & Community

Title

  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

Attorneys in Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, New York City

  • People
  • Practice Areas
  • News + Insights
  • About Our Firm
  • COVID 19: Answers to Business Challenges
ShareBookmarkPDF

U.S. Supreme Court To Rule Upon Transgender Student Issue

Articles November 1, 2016

In the latest development of transgender student issues, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the ruling of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in the matter of Gloucester County School Board v. G.G., 822 F.3d 709 (4th Cir. 2016). In April, the 4th Circuit ruled that the U.S. Department of Education’s interpretation of Title IX, as set forth in a “Dear Colleague Letter,” to require school districts to allow transgender students to use restroom and locker room facilities consistent with their gender identity was entitled to deference. Previously, the Supreme Court granted the school district’s emergency petition seeking a stay of that ruling. The stay remains in effect pending a decision on the merits by the Supreme Court. In accepting the case for review, the Supreme Court will rule upon the following specific legal issues: (1) Should deference extend to an unpublished agency letter that does not carry the force of law and was adopted in the context of the very dispute in which deference is sought?; and (2) with or without deference to the agency, should the Department of Education’s specific interpretation of Title IX and its regulations be given effect?  The Court’s decision can be expected in June 2017.

For additional information contact Matt Hoffman.

Primary Sidebar

Related

Topics

  • Municipal & School

People

  • Matthew M. Hoffman
© 2021 All Rights Reserved|Tucker Arensberg, P.C.|Log in|Powered by Content Pilot
  • Sitemap
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Accept