An article fromDive Brief House education committee advances bill to define sex as ‘biological’

The Republican-led Title IX Clarification Act would narrow the definition under the sex-based anti-discrimination law, codifying a recent Supreme Court ruling.

Published July 23, 2026Anna Merod Reporter

• Share
  • Copy link
  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • X/Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Print
• License
• Add us on Google

The U.S. Capitol building is shown on April 20, 2026, in Washington, D.C. The House Education and Workforce Committee on July 21, 2026, advanced the Title IX Clarification Act that would define "sex" as biological sex under the anti-discrimination law. Heather Diehl via Getty Images

First published on

Listen to the article 4 min This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback. Dive Brief:

• The House Education and Workforce Committee advanced a proposal Tuesday to define “sex” as biological sex under Title IX. The Republican-led Title IX Clarification Act of 2026 seeks to codify a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in West Virginia v. B.P.J.
• Democrats on the committee opposed the Title IX bill, as Ranking Member Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., said in his opening statement during Tuesday’s markup that the legislation would “narrow the scope of existing civil rights law by writing transgender students out of Title IX’s protections.”
• In the Supreme Court’s joint decision in two related cases — West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox — all justices agreed that Title IX, a federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in education, allows athletic teams to be separated based on sex.

if (window.dfp_visibility === 'mobile' ) googletag.cmd.push(function() googletag.defineSlot( '/3618/highereddive/highereddivehybrid1', [[300, 250], 'fluid'], 'dfp-hybrid1-mobile' ).addService(googletag.pubads()); ); waitToLoadAds.push(function() googletag.cmd.push(function() if (window.dfp_visibility === 'mobile' ) window.onDvtagReady?.(() => googletag.display('dfp-hybrid1-mobile')); googletag.pubads().addEventListener('slotRenderEnded', function (event) var adUnitPath = '/3618/highereddive/highereddivehybrid1'; var onProformative = false; if (onProformative && event.slot.getAdUnitPath() === adUnitPath && !event.isEmpty ) var adUnitPathWithVisibility = adUnitPath + '-mobile'; var selector = '.pf-comments__ad-wrapper #dfp-hybrid1-mobile'; if (!$(selector).closest('.pf-comments__ad-wrapper').hasClass('borders')) $(selector).closest('.pf-comments__ad-wrapper').addClass('borders') ); ); ); if (window.dfp_visibility === 'desktop' ) googletag.cmd.push(function() googletag.defineSlot( '/3618/highereddive/highereddivehybrid2', [[300, 250], 'fluid'], 'dfp-hybrid2-desktop' ).addService(googletag.pubads()); ); waitToLoadAds.push(function() googletag.cmd.push(function() if (window.dfp_visibility === 'desktop' ) window.onDvtagReady?.(() => googletag.display('dfp-hybrid2-desktop')); googletag.pubads().addEventListener('slotRenderEnded', function (event) var adUnitPath = '/3618/highereddive/highereddivehybrid2'; var onProformative = false; if (onProformative && event.slot.getAdUnitPath() === adUnitPath && !event.isEmpty ) var adUnitPathWithVisibility = adUnitPath + '-desktop'; var selector = '.pf-comments__ad-wrapper #dfp-hybrid2-desktop'; if (!$(selector).closest('.pf-comments__ad-wrapper').hasClass('borders')) $(selector).closest('.pf-comments__ad-wrapper').addClass('borders') ); ); ); Dive Insight:

The Supreme Court’s June ruling ultimately permits at least 27 states to continue their policies that ban transgender students from playing on athletic teams that align with their gender identity. However, the justices did not prohibit policies in other states like California that allow transgender students to participate in sports that align with their gender identities. 

The Republican-led effort to codify the Supreme Court’s ruling on Title IX is happening as education policy experts project that the U.S. Department of Education may rely on the same case in decision-making on other LGBTQ+ issues, such as pronoun usage or bathroom and locker room access in schools. 

The committee also advanced several K-12 proposals, including those to allow parents to opt their child out of school-issued surveys or evaluations; to permit the use of federal education dollars to train students and teachers to safely and effectively use artificial intelligence; and to revive the Presidential Fitness Test to promote physical activity for students.

The committee’s Republicans released a Tuesday statement saying the 10 total bills that advanced out of the markup “aim to protect women and girls, safeguard the rights of students and parents, prepare students and educators to use AI safely and effectively in the classroom, [and] encourage healthy habits among children.”

Two civil rights advocacy groups and the National Education Association sent separate letters to the committee earlier this week calling on lawmakers to oppose H.R. 8781, the Title IX bill. 

NEA, the nation’s largest teachers’ union, wrote to the committee on July 20 that the Title IX bill “would substantially narrow protections for transgender students and undermine the overall purpose of Title IX: preventing discrimination in education.”

If enacted, NEA said, fallout from the bill could include the limitation of trans students from participating on sports teams and accessing restrooms or locker rooms that align with their gender identity. The legislation could increase stigmatization and discrimination toward trans and nonbinary students. 

Additionally, there could be legal conflicts with some court decisions and state laws, the union said.

In the Human Rights Campaign’s letter to the committee, the group said that Title IX isn’t about “simply reducing kids to their reproductive functions.” The law prohibits actions that “hold students to inappropriate sex stereotypes,” the letter said. That can include ensuring schools address sexual assault, protecting boys from being “singled out for not being masculine enough,” and that schools offer equal resources for segregated activities based on sex. 

“The purpose of having civil rights protections in education is to ensure that every student has access to the educational opportunities they are entitled to,” the Human Rights Campaign said. “By contrast, H.R. 8781, which seeks to write LGBTQ+ students out of Title IX’s protections, does the opposite.”

As of Wednesday, there were no Senate companion bills for any of the K-12 measures that were advanced to the full House for a vote, according to Congress.gov.

• Add us on Google
• Share
  • Copy link
  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • X/Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • License

Filed Under: Federal Policy, Students Higher Ed Dive news delivered to your inbox

Get the free daily newsletter read by industry experts

Email:

• Select user consent: By signing up to receive our newsletter, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe at anytime.

Sign up A valid email address is required. Please select at least one newsletter.Editors' picks

• Rob Carr / Staff via Getty ImagesJohns Hopkins lays off 110 employees in the wake of federal research cuts

  "As our federal research portfolio shrinks, the infrastructure around it must change in parallel,” a spokesperson for the private university said.

  By Ben Unglesbee • June 26, 2026
• Douglas Rissing via Getty ImagesAnother wave of Education Department regulations is coming

  The Trump administration unveiled its timeline for a host of regulatory changes, including those related to accreditation, diversity initiatives and Title VI. 

  By Natalie Schwartz • July 8, 2026