In a pivotal moment for LGBTQ+ rights and religious exemption debates, the case of Elizabeth Hunter, et al. v. U.S. Department of Education is back in the spotlight as it heads to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This high-profile case, originally filed in 2021, challenges the constitutionality and implementation of religious exemptions to Title IX, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex in educational institutions.
Background of the Case
In March 2021, the Religious Exemption Accountability Project (REAP) filed a class action lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education, alleging that the agency was complicit in the mistreatment of LGBTQ+ students at taxpayer-funded religious colleges and universities. The lawsuit, spearheaded by a group of students, alumni, and expelled individuals, argued that religious exemptions allowed these institutions to discriminate against LGBTQ+ students without losing access to federal funding.
The case, Elizabeth Hunter, et al. v. U.S. Department of Education, was dismissed by the Oregon federal district court in January 2023. The court ruled that while the plaintiffs had adequately demonstrated their injuries resulting from religious exemptions, they failed to prove that these exemptions were motivated by an impermissible purpose. This decision left many of the 40 plaintiffs without legal recourse despite acknowledging the harm they had suffered.
Recent Developments and Appeals
In August 2023, the Hunter plaintiffs appealed the district court’s dismissal, filing their opening brief before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeal brings together a mix of current students, recent alumni, and those recently expelled, all united in their pursuit of justice. The legal team is set to argue the case before the Ninth Circuit on July 16, with the oral arguments scheduled to be streamed live.
The central issue of the case is the religious exemption from Title IX, which the plaintiffs argue has been used to justify discrimination against LGBTQ+ students in religious educational institutions. They contend that these schools, including prominent ones like Brigham Young University (BYU), should be denied federal education funds if they violate LGBTQ+ nondiscrimination protections.
Support and Opposition
The dismissal of the case in 2023 was met with mixed reactions. Religious liberty advocates applauded the decision, arguing that the lawsuit was an attempt to undermine constitutional protections for religious freedom. The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention issued a statement supporting the ruling, emphasizing the right of educational institutions to adhere to their religious convictions and provide a space for students who share those beliefs.
Conversely, the case has garnered strong support from a coalition of 19 state attorneys general who have filed amicus briefs in favor of the plaintiffs. Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum criticized the previous administration’s rollback of protections for marginalized groups and called for a strengthening of Title IX to ensure that students are aware of their rights before enrolling in educational institutions.
Broader Implications and Student Activism
The lawsuit and its appeal come amid a broader reckoning within religious higher education institutions. Over the past few years, there has been increasing student activism against discriminatory policies at religious colleges. Protests have erupted at institutions such as Seattle Pacific University and Baylor University, where students have challenged policies that discriminate against LGBTQ+ individuals.
In October 2022, a nationwide student walkout took place across more than 100 campuses, highlighting the perceived loopholes in Title IX exemptions that allow for LGBTQ+ discrimination. This student-led movement underscores the growing demand for inclusive policies and equal treatment within religious institutions.
Statements from Plaintiffs and Advocacy Groups
The plaintiffs, including Kalie Hargrove, a former student at Lincoln Christian University, have expressed deep disappointment with the dismissal of the case. Hargrove’s experience—being publicly dehumanized, expelled, and threatened—highlights the severe personal impact of the issues at hand. Hargrove criticized both the Department of Education and the Department of Justice for failing to protect LGBTQ+ students and upholding their dignity.
REAP and its supporters continue to advocate for the protection of LGBTQ+ students’ rights and the reconsideration of religious exemptions that they believe enable discrimination. The ongoing legal battle underscores the tension between religious freedom and civil rights protections, with significant implications for the future of LGBTQ+ students in religious higher education.
Looking Ahead
As the appeal progresses, the outcome of Hunter v. U.S. Department of Education could set a precedent for how religious exemptions to Title IX are applied and challenged in the future. The case remains a critical focal point in the ongoing debate over the balance between religious liberty and LGBTQ+ rights, with the potential to reshape policies affecting thousands of students across the country.
FAQ
1. What is the Hunter v. U.S. Department of Education case about? The case challenges the constitutionality of religious exemptions to Title IX, arguing that these exemptions allow religious colleges to discriminate against LGBTQ+ students while still receiving federal funding.
2. Why was the case dismissed by the Oregon federal district court? The court acknowledged the harm suffered by the plaintiffs but ruled that they did not sufficiently prove that the religious exemptions were motivated by impermissible purposes. As a result, the case was dismissed without providing the plaintiffs legal recourse.
3. What are the key arguments of the plaintiffs in the appeal? The plaintiffs argue that religious exemptions to Title IX enable discrimination against LGBTQ+ students and that institutions violating nondiscrimination protections should lose access to federal funds.
4. How have religious liberty groups reacted to the case? Religious liberty groups have supported the dismissal, arguing that the lawsuit undermines constitutional protections for religious freedom and the right of institutions to adhere to their beliefs.
5. What support has the case received from state officials? Nineteen state attorneys general have filed amicus briefs in support of the plaintiffs, criticizing the previous administration’s rollbacks of protections and calling for a strengthening of Title IX.
6. What broader issues are connected to this case? The case is part of a broader movement against discriminatory policies in religious higher education, with increasing student activism and protests highlighting concerns about LGBTQ+ discrimination and the adequacy of Title IX exemptions.
