Page:Adams ex rel. Kasper v. School Board of St. Johns County, Florida (2018).pdf/63

 IX prohibits discrimination against transgender students in school facilities just as Title VII prohibit[s] discrimination [against a gender non-conforming employee in the workplace]”) (citing,,  and ); , 858 F.3d at 1048 (citing  as support for the proposition that “[b]y definition, a transgender individual does not conform to the sex-based stereotypes of the sex that he or she was assigned at birth”; thus, when a person is punished for their gender non-conformity by refusing them use of a bathroom that accords with their gender identity, Title IX is violated); , 302 F. Supp. 3d at 746 (concluding a transgender student can state a claim of sex discrimination under Title IX by extension of the analysis of numerous Title VII and federal civil rights cases, including , which recognize that “claims of discrimination on the basis of transgender status are per se sex discrimination”); , ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, 2018 WL 3550267, *22–23 (D. Ore. July 24, 2018) (citing,, , , , , and  for support in concluding that “to require students to use only facilities that match their biological sex or to use gender-neutral alternative facilities would violate Title IX”).

This Court likewise follows the guidance of and other authorities cited above to conclude that the meaning of “sex” in Title IX includes “gender identity” for purposes of its application to transgender students. , 723 F. App’x 964, 965, n.2 (11th Cir. May 10, 2018) (unpub.) (per