At the school board meeting on Feb. 20, Marcia Miller, Assistant Superintendent Special Education and Student Support Services, and Sarah Matlock, Director of Student Services, presented information about Title IX, student privacy as well as immigration.
“Part of our goal is to clear up misinformation,” said Superintendent Jeff Aranguena.
“This is an opportunity to get the correct information and ask questions.”
Miller provided some background about Title IX.
Title IX
Title IX states, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
The 1972 federal civil rights law was designed to address pervasive gender inequities in education, particularly in higher education and athletics .
The impact on schools are that it mandates gender equity, equal funding, facilities and opportunities for boys and girls in sports while also ensuring females have access to traditionally male-dominated fields (STEM, Vocational Ed.). Title IX also requires schools to adopt policies to prevent and respond to sexual harassment and violence.
On Jan. 9, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky struck down the newer April 2024 rules.
“In April 2024 there were some slight changes made to expand protections against sex discrimination to include sexual orientation and gender identity, definitions, grievance process, reporting obligations and training requirements,” Miller explained.
“This ruling means everyone must revert back to the 2020 Title IX rules.”
MCUSD is working with legal counsel on updating impacted policies and regulations to go back to the 2020 Title IX rules.
The district is still required to follow California Education Code, which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
“Even though the rules were struck down at the Federal level, we’re still required to follow California Ed. Code.”
Overall, there will likely be limited impact. MCUSD receives very few Title IX complaints— this only changes technicalities in how official complaints are processed.
“So if it’s state law, whether I agree or disagree it doesn’t matter; what would happen if I disagree,” asked Board Chair Wayne Forsythe.
“If you didn’t follow state law you’d be putting the district in liability,” Aranguena said.
Student Privacy and Parental Notification
Assembly Bill 1266 (in effect since August, 2013) explains a transgender or gender nonconforming student may not express their gender identity openly in all contexts, including at home.
Revealing a student’s gender identity or expression to others may compromise the student’s safety. Thus, preserving a student’s privacy is of the utmost importance.
The right of transgender students to keep their transgender status private is grounded in California’s anti-discrimination laws as well as federal and state laws.
Disclosing that a student is transgender without the student’s permission may violate California’s antidiscrimination law by increasing the student’s vulnerability to harassment and may violate the student’s right to privacy.
“We’ve been following that law since 2013,” Miller explained.
MCUSD’s Anti-discrimination harassment policy, AR 5145.3 states students have a right to privacy.
A student’s intersex, nonbinary, transgender or gender nonconforming status is student’s private information.
The district may only disclose private information with student’s written consent or when otherwise required by law.
“That’s the history plus the policy we have in place,” Miller said.
In July, 2023 Chino Valley Unified School District adopted a board policy requiring parental notification when students requested to use a different name or pronoun or to use facilities aligned with gender ID that differed from official record.
California District Attorney Rob Bonta sued CVUSD and the court ruled in favor of the state that CVUSD could not require parental notification in these cases.
“If you break the law the state will sue you,” Miller said.
“There’s definitely liability there.”
In addition to Chino Valley losing that lawsuit, California passed Assembly Bill 1955 in July 2024.
AB 1955 explicitly prohibits school districts and county offices from enacting or enforcing any policy, rule or regulation that requires an employee to disclose any information related to a student’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression to any other person without the pupil’s consent, unless otherwise required by law.
“As far as student privacy and notification goes, the district is actively monitoring changes at the state and federal level and will make adjustments as appropriate,” said Miller.
“The district will continue to follow the law as we have been.”
Immigration Enforcement
California schools serve nearly 6 million students, with almost half having at least one immigrant parent.
Approximately 133,000 undocumented and 750,000 children with undocumented parents are enrolled in California schools.
All students, regardless of immigration status, have the right to a free public education.
“That’s state and federal law,” Miller said.
California law requires all children ages six to 18 be enrolled and prohibits discrimination based on the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Plyer v. Doe guarantees undocumented students equal access to education.
There is currently proposed legislation in California, AB49 and SB48 which are aimed at protecting undocumented students and their families from federal immigration enforcement at or near school properties.
These bills seek to limit federal agents’ access to schools and daycare centers without a warrant.
AB49 requires immigration agents to obtain written permission from school superintendents before entering school property and bars agents from being in rooms where children are present.
SB48 prohibits local police from cooperating with federal immigration agents within one mile of a school and restricts access to sharing students’ immigration information.
“Those are going through the system right now,” Miller explained.
“We’re waiting to see if either of those pass.”
In January, the Trump administration reversed guidance dating back to 2011 that restricts Immigration agencies from detaining immigrants near locations like schools, childcare centers, hospitals, etc.
“This means that officers are now able to make arrests in these locations,” said Miller.
The concerns to this are potential impacts to attendance and enrollment that could impact student learning and district budget and also potential impact to student and family financial stability and mental health and wellbeing.
“The district is carefully watching this issue as it evolves,” Miller explained.
“The district has shared resources and training with staff related to immigration and what to do if an immigration agent shows up on school grounds.”
A member of the board of trustees asked if resources and materials had been shared with families.
“We’ve shared resources that can be shared with families,” Miller explained.
“We’re doing it on the as needed basis by working with principals to have them in the moments they are needed.”
Another question asked was “how many undocumented students are in the district?”
“I do not know that,” Miller explained.
“It’s not something that we track and it’s not something we’re allowed to ask upon enrollment.”
Trustee Jenni Moore referenced how this same topic may have been a concern back in 2017 for many families.
“Looking back, do you have any picture as to the actual impact of that concern on attendance and student success?”
Miller explained that she was in a different position back then but that she “did not recall this level of concern back then.”
The presentation along with reference links can be viewed online at go.boarddocs.com/ca/mcusd/Board.nsf/files/DE44X30DA013/$file/Board%20Report%20Title%20IX%2C%20Student%20Privacy%2C%20Immigration.pptx.pdf
Responses (0)