Cases & Advocacy
M.A., et al. v. Florida State Board of Education et al.
NCLR, along with lawyers from Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP, filed a complaint on March 31, 2022, on behalf of Equality Florida (EQFL), as well as students, parents, and a teacher, all of whom continue to face harmful repercussions resulting from the passage of the law. The complaint alleges that HB 1557 is unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Roe v. Herrington
Plaintiffs D.T., Jane Doe, and Helen Roe are transgender children who unable to correct the gender markers on their birth certificates because of Arizona’s discriminatory laws. Arizona requires transgender people to undergo surgery to obtain a birth certificate that matches who they are.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Equality Arizona v. Hoffman
A federal lawsuit that led to the repeal of Arizona’s anti-LGBTQ curriculum law, which barred public school students from receiving medically accurate, age-appropriate information about non-heterosexual people in their health education classes.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Gender and Sexuality Alliance v. Spearman
NCLR and co-counsel filed a federal lawsuit challenging a South Carolina statute that prohibits public school health education from including any discussion of same-sex relationships except in the context of sexually transmitted diseases. The district court entered a consent decree and judgment declaring the challenged provision unconstitutional and barring its enforcement in South Carolina.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Meriwether v. Shawnee State University
Jane Doe filed a Title IX complaint with Shawnee State University after Professor Meriwether refused to use female honorifics and pronouns when referring to Jane in class. When the university placed a discipline letter in his personnel file, Meriwether sued the university claiming that the disciplinary action infringed on his First Amendment right to free speech and free exercise of religion, among other violations of federal and state law.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Vlaming v. West Point School Board
John Doe is a transgender student at West Point High School. Despite repeated requests, John’s French teacher, Peter Vlaming, refused to use male pronouns when referring to John. Vlaming was fired in December 2018 and subsequently sued the West Point School Board for allegedly violating his constitutional right to free speech and free excerise of religion, among other claims.
MoreCases & Advocacy
G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board Amicus
Gavin Grimm transitioned in his sophomore year of high school and started using the boys’ restroom. Despite using the restroom for nearly two months without incident, the Gloucester County School Board adopted a policy prohibiting him and other transgender students from using the facilities that match their gender identity. Gavin sued his school district for violating federal law.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Highland Local School District v. U.S. Dept. of Educ.
Jane Doe is an 11-year-old transgender girl in the Highland Local Schools. For the past three years, the District has refused to treat her as female for all purposes, causing her to be ostracized and leading to frequent bullying and humiliation by teachers, staff, and students. Following an investigation, the U.S. Department of Education recently concluded that the District is violating Title IX.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Doe v. Boyertown Area School District Amicus
A group of nontransgender students in the Boyertown Area School District sued the school district for allowing transgender students to access facilities that were consistent with their gender identity. The students claimed that the school district’s policy violated their right to privacy and created a hostile school environment.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Parents for Privacy v. Barr Amicus
On November 11, 2017, a group of parents challenged their local school district’s policy of permitting transgender students to use the facilities consistent with the student’s gender identity. The school district moved to dismiss the complaint. On July 24, 2018, the District Court dismissed the parents’ claims, finding that the district’s transgender-inclusive policies do not violate the rights of non-transgender students. The parents appealed.
More
