Committee debate centers on removing or preserving references to gender identity, sexual orientation and 'biological sex' across policies

The New Hanover County Schools policy committee’s March 11 meeting returned repeatedly to a single, recurring issue: whether to remove, retain or reword references to gender identity, sexual orientation and the phrase “biological sex” from multiple district policies.

Committee members and staff discussed the edits across many agenda items — curriculum, nondiscrimination, student discipline, health education and operational policies — and sought counsel’s guidance about what local policy can say without creating legal exposure. The debate split along legal and philosophical lines: some members urged that the district keep protective language explicitly naming sexual orientation and gender identity; other members and counsel warned that recent federal decisions and circuit-court interpretations complicate how those terms should appear in local policy.

Why it matters: the exact wording used in nondiscrimination and curriculum policies affects how schools design opt-in family-life lessons, how staff implement discipline and how procurement and program compliance are documented. Because federal courts and the U.S. Department of Education have taken differing positions on interpretation of civil-rights statutes, the committee sought written legal analysis and chose to forward many items to the full board with counsel’s input.

What committee members said

- Judy Justice (committee member) pushed for preserving traditional language and emphasized teaching U.S. history and constitutional principles. In debate she said, "I taught U.S. history for many years in civics...This is a democracy. I taught it for years to students and I stress the importance of our founding document, the Constitution." She also said during debate on multiple edits, "I’m gonna vote against everything that’s brought up because I think it’s ridiculous," objecting to removing certain terminology.

- Other committee members and staff urged caution about wording that might conflict with federal-court interpretations. Board counsel weighed in several times, advising the committee that the statutory terms (for example, Title IX’s reference to "sex") have been interpreted by some courts to include gender-identity claims while other courts have taken a narrower view. That legal uncertainty led the committee to remove some specific references in committee-drafted language while requesting formal counsel memoranda before the full board acts.

Legal framing from counsel

- Committee counsel (board attorneys) explained the difference between statutory text and judicial interpretation: the statutes (Title VII and Title IX) use the general term "sex," and federal courts and administrative agencies have construed that word in different ways. One attorney noted that "Title VII has been construed to include gender identity" in some contexts but cautioned that court rulings and circuit splits (the Fourth Circuit was mentioned) can determine how a local board’s policy will be read if challenged.

- Counsel also emphasized that local policy cannot contradict state or federal law and reminded members that certain reporting and outreach obligations (for example, minority-business reporting tied to state-funded construction projects) remain legally required regardless of board policy wording.

How the committee acted

- For several policies that contained contested nondiscrimination wording (for example, sections of policies on student conduct and curriculum, plus related operational policies), the committee either forwarded edited versions to the full board with counsel’s suggested language, or held the items for further legal review.

- Specific actions recorded in the meeting included holding Policy 1720 (nondiscrimination language) in committee for counsel analysis; removing the words "gender identity" from certain paragraphs in Policy 91 20 and 91 25 as part of intermediate edits; and forwarding comprehensive-health and family-life policy changes to the full board along with staff procedures for parental opt-in and lesson notification.

What was not decided

- The committee did not adopt a single, district-wide phrasing on whether the policy should use "sex," "biological sex," "gender identity," or name "sexual orientation." Instead, after prolonged debate it requested counsel to provide written analysis and examples and asked staff to provide side-by-side language options for the full board.

Ending

Because multiple policies affect curriculum, discipline and operations, the committee asked for legal memoranda and sample language so the full board can weigh the policy and statutory interplay. Staff and counsel will return with draft language and examples; the committee’s action ensures the full board considers the legal analysis before a final vote.