Let’s Talk - Lozano Smith Podcast

Episode 98 Gender Identity, Title IX, and Equal Protection: Status of Federal and California Law and Pending Litigation

Let’s Talk - Lozano Smith Podcast

Show Notes

In this episode, host Sloan Simmons joins Title IX experts Sarah Fama and Sinead McDonough for a comprehensive discussion regarding the status of the law as it pertains to gender identity, students, and schools. Topics covered include the current status of California and federal law and policy on point, as well as the wide-ranging scope of pending litigation poised to impact this area of school law.

Show Notes & References

1:54 – Foundational cases impacting Title IX policy (Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) 140 S. Ct. 1731) (Client News Brief 50 – June 2020)

2:55 – Grabowski v. Arizona Board of Regents (9th Cir. 2023) 69 F.4th 1110

5:51 – Parents for Privacy vs. Barr (9th Cir. 2020) 949 F.3d 1210 (Client News Brief 40 – May 2020)

10:48 – Roe vs. Critchfield (9th Cir. 2025) 137 F.4th 912 (Client News Brief 14 – April 2025)

12:49 – Jones, et al. v. Critchfield, et al., Ninth Circuit Case No. 25-5413

13:44 – Regino vs. Blake (formerly Staley) (9th Cir. 2025) (Client News Brief 17 – April 2025)

14:57 – Assembly Bill (AB) 1266

20:00 – United States v. Skrmetti (2025) 605 U.S. 495

22:24 – The law in California

23:25 – CIF (California Interscholastic Federation) Rule 300D and Guidelines for Gender Identity Participation

24:36 – Interactions with federal law

25:56 – Executive Order (EO) 14168 (Client News Brief 12 – February 2025)

27:01 – Tennessee v. Cardona decision

28:29 – Dear Colleague letter – February 4, 2025

30:32 – Federal government’s approach and reaction to CIF and AB 1266 (USDOE Press Releases: February 12, 2025; March 27, 2025; June 25, 2025)

34:00 – Related Supreme Court cases (Little v. Hecox, Case No. No. 24-38; West Virginia v. B.P.J., Case No. 24-43)

35:09 – T.S. et al. v. Riverside Unified School District et al., U.S.D.C., Central District of California, Case No. 5:24-cv-02480-SSS-SP, and order on motion to dismiss, (C.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2025) 2025 WL 2884416

36:25 – Protections for student privacy and their interactions with parental rights

39:22 – Mirabelli vs. Olson et al.¸U.S.D.C., Southern District of California, Case No. 3:23-cv-00768-BEN-VET

40:00 – The SAFETY Act (AB 1955)

44:13 – The dynamic between the federal government and California post-AB 1955 enactment (United States of America v. California Interscholastic Federation et al., U.S.D.C., Central District of California, 8:25-cv-01485-CV-JDE)

50:26 – Foote v. Ludlow School Committee, Case No. 25-77

52:19 – Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025) 606 U.S. 522 (Listen to Episode 97 Mahmoud v. Taylor) (Client News Brief 28 – July 2025)

53:31 – Access to facilities

55:15 – Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board (4th Cir. 2020) 972 F.3d 586

56:06 – Million Dollar Question: Does Title IX protect individuals based on gender identity or not?

For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast

Disclaimer: As the information contained herein is necessarily general, its application to a particular set of facts and circumstances may vary. For this reason, this podcast episode does not constitute legal advice. We recommend that you consult with your counsel prior to acting on the information contained herein.

More from Let’s Talk - Lozano Smith Podcast

Oct 20, 2026

When it comes to school and community college district projects, correctly classifying work as “maintenance” or “construction” can make or break your bidding and contracting process. In this episode, Lozano Smith attorneys Arne Sandberg and Andrea Olivarez join host Sloan Simmons to unpack the key distinctions between these two categories, how they impact contract structure and bidding requirements, and what your team needs to know about competitive thresholds and UPCCAA procedures. Whether you’re drafting a contract or preparing to go out to bid, this discussion offers essential guidance to ensure compliance and clarity.

Sep 17, 2026

In this episode, host Michelle Cannon engages with Lozano Smith Litigation Practice Group Co-Chair Sloan Simmons and Student Practice Group Co-Chair Kyle Raney to discuss the current state of the law in California under Mirabelli v. Bonta and Mahmoud v. Taylor. The discussion reviews developments and what is anticipated in the courts through the conclusion of 2026 in relation to these cases and parallel litigation, and covers best practices and policy options for school officials due to the current status of the law.

Sep 15, 2026

Public employees and officials have the right to participate in political activity, but important restrictions apply when personal advocacy intersects with public employment and agency resources. In this episode, host Michelle Cannon connects with Lozano Smith attorneys Scott Cross and Gail Zurek to discuss how public employees and officials can distinguish between permissible private political activity and conduct performed in an official capacity. The conversation explores campaign activity during work and personal time, the use of agency facilities and resources, political forums and campaign materials, and the rules governing uniforms, agency logos, and equipment. The discussion also examines how public agencies may provide neutral information about ballot measures without engaging in advocacy, along with restrictions involving campaign solicitations, political benefits, and the Levine Act.

Aug 26, 2026

California’s SB 848 introduces significant new requirements for educational agencies related to ensuring the safety of students. In this episode, host Michelle Cannon connects with Lozano Smith attorneys Carolyn Gemma and Brianna Ramos to discuss the background behind these new requirements and what educational agencies need to know as implementation continues. The conversation explores key changes, including new legal obligations regarding employment screening, comprehensive safety plans, mandated reports, and employee trainings. The discussion provides practical insights to help educational agencies understand the law’s various effective dates and take steps to maintain compliance moving forward.

Aug 11, 2026

California’s AB 126 introduces significant changes to charter school oversight and authorizer responsibilities. In this episode, host Sloan Simmons connects with Lozano Smith’s Charter Practice Group Co-Chairs, Ed Sklar and Erin Hamor, to discuss the background behind these reforms and what they mean for charter schools and authorizers. The conversation explores key changes, including expanded oversight requirements, enhanced fiscal monitoring obligations, fraud reporting responsibilities, and further clarifications to California’s Charter Schools Act. The discussion provides practical insights to help authorizers prepare through policy updates, strengthened protocols, and improved documentation practices.

See all episodes →