The Impact of a Protective Federal Ruling for Transgender Students Across Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin

• In Event: Undermining Equity and Justice: Navigating a Hostile Sociopolitical Climate in PK–12 Schools

Abstract

Purpose:
While LBGTQ+-inclusive state and school board non-discrimination policies have been linked to better health outcomes, such as fewer suicide attempts among adolescents (Aivadyan et al., 2023), enumerating these protections for transgender students remains a hotly contested policy issue (Author et al, 2022). However, PK-12 administrators cite the importance of federal mandates in their decision-making process concerning students’ access to facilities (Author, 2022). This study examines whether local school boards responded to a federal ruling in Whitaker v. Kenosha Unified School District by adopting school board policies that would protect transgender students from discrimination in three Midwestern states – Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. In 2017, the Seventh Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals created clear case law by affirming transgender and nonbinary students’ nondiscrimination protections and access to bathroom facilities. The consistent federal case law and inconsistent state laws concerning LGBTQ+ rights across these three Midwestern states enables an examination of federal and state forces on local school board policies.

Framework:
The analysis of how school boards negotiate controversial policies from judicial and legislative bodies draws from institutional theory (Meyer & Rowan, 1977) and the organizational literature concerning the scaling and spread of organizational reform (Coburn, 2003; Cohen et al., 2018; Glennan et al., 2004). School boards negotiate what elements of and how to enact controversial legislation or guidance from high-order governing bodies, such as state legislators, or the U.S. Federal District Courts. Our evaluation of the alignment between the federal courts down to school boards explores one possible catalyst for policy uptake.

Methods & Data Analysis:
Across all three states, we first gathered state-level legislation and bills related to the Whitaker case from state legislative registers. Next, we collected executive orders and resources from state departments of education, followed by the policies and administrative procedures concerning transgender students from the five largest local school boards. Following this multi-level policy collection process, we conducted a conceptual content analysis (Carley, 1990) of proposed state legislative bills, enacted legislation, and executive actions; state intermediary organizations’ policies; and local school district policies and procedures using a priori codes from a previous content analysis project (Author, 2021) and open coding using grounded theory (Charmaz, 2014).

Results & Significance:
This case study of three states indicates that local school boards may resist trans-affirming interpretations of Title IX when state legislation does not also explicitly protect transgender students. Of the fifteen most populous districts in each state, ten had policies following the Whitaker decision by explicitly protecting trans students from discrimination. Only Illinois enumerated nondiscrimination protections for transgender students across state laws, executive guidance, and all local board policies. Three of the five districts in Wisconsin, a state without legislative protections or guidance, included protections for transgender students. Indiana lacked statutory protections or guidance for students; however, two of the five districts included nondiscrimination protections for transgender students. Our results indicate the importance of both federal and state top-down policy forces to complement the bottom-up community advocacy to support transgender students.

Authors

• Mollie McQuillan, University of Wisconsin - Madison

• Benjamin Lebovitz, University of Wisconsin - Madison

• LaShanda Harbin, University of Wisconsin - Madison