Judge rejects DOJ bid to join Loudoun County locker room case
A federal judge denied the Justice Department’s attempt to join a civil-rights lawsuit filed by two Loudoun County high school boys who were suspended after objecting, on religious grounds, to a transgender student using the boys’ locker room. Judge Leonie M. Brinkema refused the DOJ’s motion to intervene as a co-plaintiff, dismissed 3 of 12 claims in the suit, and ordered mediation between the parties.
The case stems from Loudoun County Public Schools’ Policy 8040, which lets students use facilities consistent with their “consistently asserted gender identity.” A biologically female student who identifies as transgender allegedly used the boys’ locker room and secretly recorded classmates, and two boys were later disciplined for Title IX sexual harassment based largely on that video. The DOJ’s civil-rights division had argued it could intervene under federal law and that the school’s policy and discipline violated the students’ religious beliefs and equal-protection rights; Virginia’s attorney general and the Department of Education have also investigated, with the DOE finding the boys were wrongly punished.The litigation is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, and Loudoun County is barred from further disciplining the students while the case proceeds.
Judge rejects DOJ bid to join Loudoun County locker room case on behalf of suspended boys
A federal judge has reportedly rejected the Justice Department’s request to join a civil rights case brought by two high school boys in Northern Virginia who were suspended on Title IX sexual harassment charges after privately objecting to a transgender student’s presence in the boys’ locker room.
During a hearing held on Friday morning, Judge Leonie M. Brinkema denied the DOJ’s motion to intervene in the case as a co-plaintiff against Loudoun County Public Schools, according to WJLA’s Nick Minock.
Brinkema, who also weighed the school district’s motion to dismiss all claims, dropped 3 out of 12 counts lodged in the lawsuit.
Following the ruling, Brinkema ordered mediation between the parties.
In December, the DOJ asked to be added to the litigation, arguing that Section 902 of the 1964 Civil Rights Act gives the U.S. government “an unconditional statutory right to intervene” whenever a litigant sues under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
Attorneys with the DOJ’s civil rights division alleged that LCPS discriminated against the boys, both of whom are practicing Christians, for raising religious objections to the school’s transgender bathroom policies.
LCPS Policy 8040 permits students to access school facilities corresponding with their “consistently asserted gender identity,” regardless of biological sex.
For months, a biologically female student at Stone Bridge High School was able to access the boys’ locker room pursuant to Policy 8040. In one incident from March 2025, the student, who identifies as transgender, secretly filmed several male classmates, some while they were changing clothes, as they discussed among themselves their discomfort with the transgender individual’s usage of the boys’ locker room.
OPINION: LOUDOUN COUNTY PUNISHES STUDENTS FOR BEING SEXUALLY HARASSED
Two of the boys, then sophomores, later sued LCPS for finding them guilty of Title IX violations, findings which were primarily based on the illicitly recorded video.
According to the DOJ, the two boys who spoke out are obligated by their religious beliefs to respect the biological distinctions between the two sexes and accordingly use sex-segregated facilities.
Furthermore, the DOJ said that Policy 8040 effectively requires all students, without regard for their religious views, to adopt the school board’s beliefs about affirming gender identity.
“From using preferred pronouns to sharing intimate spaces with students of the opposite sex, the School Board’s policy unconstitutionally directs Plaintiffs to go against their sincere religious beliefs and practice,” the DOJ argued in a brief supporting its intervention request.
Federal officials accused the school system’s policymaking body of “recasting” constitutionally protected activity as discriminatory conduct and thus grounds for disciplinary action. In particular, the DOJ said that LCPS wielded its transgender inclusion rules against the pair of Christian students and threatened their suspension following the “retaliatory” Title IX proceedings.
“Loudoun County’s decision to advance and promote gender ideology tramples on the rights of religious students who cannot embrace ideas that deny biological reality,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, the DOJ’s chief civil rights officer, said in a press release at the time of the intervention motion’s filing.
Josh Hetzler, an attorney at the Family Foundation of Virginia’s Founding Freedoms Law Center, the law firm representing the boys, said the suspensions marked a “clear departure” from constitutional protections.
“Our clients were disciplined not for misconduct, but for expressing concerns about privacy and safety—concerns any reasonable student should be free to voice,” Hetzler said. “The Constitution does not permit public schools to rebrand orthodox Christian beliefs as ‘harassment.’ The Justice Department’s intervention reinforces that fundamental truth.”
Over the summer, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, whose office launched an investigation into LCPS’s alleged mishandling of the locker room incident, referred the matter to federal authorities. Toward the start of this school year, the Department of Education’s civil rights office concluded that the boys were wrongly punished.
DOJ SUES LOUDOUN COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OVER TRANSGENDER BATHROOM POLICY
The case is currently pending before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. For now, LCPS is barred from disciplining the boys while the case is litigated.
The Washington Examiner contacted LCPS and the Founding Freedoms Law Center for comment.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
