Page:Adams ex rel. Kasper v. School Board of St. Johns County, Florida (2022).pdf/122

 “inextricably bound up with sex.” Id. In excluding Adams from a state-controlled space for a reason “inextricably bound up with sex,” the School District made a sex-based classification. See id.; Virginia, 518 U.S. at 530–31 (finding that policy of excluding women from the Virginia Military Institute was a sex-based classification requiring the application of heightened scrutiny); ''Miss. Univ. for Women v. Hogan'', 458 U.S. 718, 723 (1982) (concluding that policy of excluding men from nursing school required the application of heightened scrutiny). Heightened scrutiny applies because Adams’s exclusion from the boys’ restrooms at Nease was “based on sex” under Bostock’s logic.
 * ii.Heightened Scrutiny Applies Because Adams Is a Member of a Quasi-Suspect Class.

Adams also argues that his exclusion from the boys’ restrooms was “based on his transgender status.” Appellee’s En Banc Br. at 33. Here, Adams contends that transgender individuals form a quasi-suspect class. When a state statute or policy makes a classification based on a “quasi-suspect class,” courts apply heightened scrutiny as we would for a sex-based classification. See Cleburne, 473 U.S. at 440–42.