On Jan. 9, 2025, the Eastern District of Kentucky held in State of Tennessee, et al. v. Miguel Cardona, et al. that the U.S. Department of Education’s 2024 Final Rule implementing Title IX is “unlawful.” This court decision applies nationwide, including in New York state. The court determined in State of Tennessee that the final […]
Already an Subcriber? Log in
Get Instant Access to This Article
Become a Central New York Business Journal subscriber and get immediate access to all of our subscriber-only content and much more.
- Critical Central New York business news and analysis updated daily.
- Immediate access to all subscriber-only content on our website.
- Get a year's worth of the Print Edition of The Central New York Business Journal.
- Special Feature Publications such as the Book of Lists and Revitalize Greater Binghamton, Mohawk Valley, and Syracuse Magazines
Click here to purchase a paywall bypass link for this article.
On Jan. 9, 2025, the Eastern District of Kentucky held in State of Tennessee, et al. v. Miguel Cardona, et al. that the U.S. Department of Education’s 2024 Final Rule implementing Title IX is “unlawful.” This court decision applies nationwide, including in New York state.
The court determined in State of Tennessee that the final rule suffered from several legally fatal defects, including but not limited to the fact that the final rule:
Hilary L. Moreira and Howard M. Miller are members (partners) in the Garden City office of Syracuse–based law firm Bond, Schoeneck & King PLLC. Moreira is a labor and employment law attorney who represents and counsels employers in the public and private sectors in all areas of labor and employment law. Miller, in education law, represents public school districts and private universities throughout New York; and in private-sector employment litigation, he litigates all types of employment discrimination and retaliation claims. This Viewpoint is drawn and edited from a Jan. 15 article on Bond’s website.
- Went further than permitted by Title IX in its definition of “sex” to include gender identity;
- Inappropriately expanded the definition of “sex-based harassment” to include speech or conduct that limits a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from an educational program or activity (the prior standard required that an individual be denied the ability to participate in or benefit from an educational program or activity) ; and,
- Was so vague and overbroad that it would be difficult to predict what conduct would violate the law.
Hilary L. Moreira and Howard M. Miller are members (partners) in the Garden City office of Syracuse–based law firm Bond, Schoeneck & King PLLC. Moreira is a labor and employment law attorney who represents and counsels employers in the public and private sectors in all areas of labor and employment law. Miller, in education law, represents public school districts and private universities throughout New York; and in private-sector employment litigation, he litigates all types of employment discrimination and retaliation claims. This Viewpoint is drawn and edited from a Jan. 15 article on Bond’s website.