College and university administrators are feeling the effects of seismic shifts in the education landscape. Over the course of two weeks in January, a federal district court rescinded Biden-era 2024 Title IX regulations that expanded the landmark civil rights law, the outgoing U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) stated that Title IX applies to student-athlete name, image and likeness (NIL) payments, and President Donald Trump issued an executive order foreshadowing his priorities and impending directives regarding Title IX.
Below, our Education Industry Team examines key Title IX updates impacting ground-level compliance efforts for higher education institutions.
Title IX regulations
On January 9, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky vacated the Biden administration’s 2024 Title IX regulations nationwide. The subject of extensive litigation, the regulations expanded the categories of conduct which constituted impermissible “sex-based harassment” under Title IX and explicitly protected individuals from discrimination on the basis of sex characteristics, sexual orientation, and gender identity. With the Kentucky court’s action, the prior 2020 regulations are now in effect nationwide.
While the 2024 regulations were already enjoined in approximately half of U.S. states before the court’s ruling, schools which began the 2024-2025 academic year under the Biden-era regulations must now revive their 2020 Title IX policies and procedures. Title IX coordinators, investigators, and decision-makers should be re-trained, if necessary, on operative 2020 definitions and jurisdictional limitations.
Executive order narrows scope of protections under Title IX
On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order that foreshadows his administration’s plans surrounding sex and gender. While it does not have the force of law (executive orders cannot override existing federal laws or the U.S. Constitution), the order signals the president’s intent to narrow the scope of federal civil rights protections afforded under Title IX.
Since its inception, Title IX has been interpreted and enforced by the U.S. Department of Education (Trump vowed to abolish the agency while on the campaign trail) Over the past 52 years, the DOE’s Title IX guidance has included dozens of fact sheets and other agency documents which, among other things, interpreted the statute’s reach to protect individuals from discrimination on the basis of not only biological sex, but gender identity and sexual orientation (as espoused in the 2024 Title IX regulations published under the Biden administration).
More from UB: Students are disengaging to the point of skipping exams. This is how we can help
Trump’s executive order, in stark contrast, purports to establish a “policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female,” which the president contends are “not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.” Electing to categorize individuals as male or female based on their cellular biology at conception, the order crystallizes the Trump administration’s position that biological sex — not gender identity — is dispositive in enforcing “sex-protective laws” like Title IX.
The order specifically references the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the court determined that firing an individual employee merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Bostock held that “discrimination against a transgender individual because of [his or] her gender-nonconformity is sex discrimination, whether it’s described as being on the basis of sex or gender.” Bostock’s employment discrimination rationale was then applied to a transgender student’s public school bathroom access lawsuit later that same year. Subsequent administrative guidance stating that a Title IX analysis of alleged sex discrimination would closely mirror the analysis undertaken in Bostock “is legally untenable and has harmed women,” Trump’s executive order said.
The return of the 2020 Title IX regulations, coupled with the executive order’s sharp critique of Bostock’s application to the education context, underscores the importance of comprehensive campus community guidance documents. Colleges and universities that wish to provide protections for LGTBQ+ individuals may consider updating their anti-discrimination and harassment policies (outside of Title IX) to ensure coverage.
Athletics developments
In mid-January, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to advance the “Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025,” which seeks to amend Title IX to ban transgender girls and women from participating in women’s and girls’ sports across federally funded K-12 schools, colleges, and universities. Similar bills have been introduced in a myriad of states.
As athletics departments prepare for potential implementation of the landmark House settlement, the outgoing OCR confirmed that Title IX’s gender equity requirements will in fact apply in the modern-day name, image, and likeness (NIL) era. OCR’s recent guidance emphasized that Title IX will apply “when student-athletes receive NIL-related compensation and benefits.”
Final takeaways
There are still many unanswered questions as the political pendulum continues to swing, and managing this uncertainty is challenging for those tasked with supporting their campus communities. Title IX staff should expect further guidance from the DOE about enforcement of the 2020 regulations, and should be prepared to field questions from students and employees about their school’s Title IX procedures. Establishing clear policies related to sexual misconduct and athletics participation is paramount in today’s litigious environment.
While change, especially change of this magnitude and with this frequency, can be daunting, higher education leaders should ensure they are supported by engaging early and often with legal counsel. Set within a larger discussion of sex and gender across facets of American life from health care to employment, higher education stakeholders should be prepared to react and respond quickly as subsequent legislative and regulatory developments arise.