School bathrooms—once a mundane part of the daily routine—have become an unlikely flashpoint in America’s ongoing debate over transgender rights and federal education policy. In a series of recent legal and political skirmishes, officials in South Carolina and Denver have found themselves at the center of a national controversy, with the U.S. Supreme Court and the Department of Education both weighing in on how schools should handle restroom access for transgender students.
South Carolina’s battle began when state lawmakers tied a quarter of all public education funding to a controversial requirement: schools must ensure that students use restrooms matching the sex listed on their birth certificates, not their gender identity. The measure, included in the state’s fiscal year 2024–2025 spending bill, was set to expire at the end of June 2025 but was swiftly renewed, taking effect again on July 1. According to CBS News, the General Assembly’s near-unanimous approval signaled overwhelming legislative support. State officials argued in their emergency appeal to the Supreme Court that, “This Proviso resoundingly reflects the will of the South Carolina General Assembly, and therefore the will of the people of South Carolina, due to near unanimous approval in both chambers of the legislature.”
But the law’s real-world impact quickly became personal. In November 2024, a transgender student known in court documents as John Doe—enrolled at a Berkeley County public school—filed a lawsuit challenging the policy. Doe and his guardians claimed the restriction violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause and Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in schools. Under the state’s definitions, Doe, who identifies as male, was classified as female and barred from using the boys’ restroom. As litigation wound its way through the courts, the stakes for Doe and other transgender students only grew.
Initially, a South Carolina district court declined to block the policy while the case proceeded. But in early August 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit stepped in, granting an injunction that prevented the state from enforcing the restroom policy—at least in Doe’s specific case. The 4th Circuit’s decision leaned heavily on its 2020 ruling in the Gavin Grimm case, which found a similar policy in Virginia to be unlawful. In that precedent-setting case, the appeals court determined that requiring transgender students to use restrooms corresponding to their biological sex violated both Title IX and constitutional protections. The Supreme Court had twice declined to overturn the 4th Circuit’s Grimm decision, leaving it as binding law in the circuit.
In its ruling, the 4th Circuit noted, “Our decision in Grimm’s case remains the law of this Circuit and is thus binding on all the district courts within it.” For South Carolina’s education officials, this was a major setback. They quickly asked the Supreme Court to intervene, arguing that their policy “does not classify or discriminate on the basis of sex, and does not discriminate against transgender students.” They insisted that the policy was about preserving privacy and respecting the will of South Carolina voters while the legal battle continued. “Ultimately, this policy choice is one in which the Court must defer to the appropriate legislative body,” state officials wrote in their emergency appeal.
Meanwhile, nearly 1,500 miles away, Denver Public Schools found itself embroiled in a parallel dispute—this time with the federal government. On August 29, 2025, Denver school officials publicly challenged a U.S. Education Department finding that their multi-stall all-gender bathrooms violate Title IX. The department, acting on a probe begun under the Trump administration, had given the district 10 days to rescind any policies allowing students to use bathrooms based on gender identity, or else face unspecified enforcement actions—including the potential loss of federal funding.
The controversy in Denver began after East High School, in January 2025, converted a girls’ restroom into an all-gender facility. The move was the result of a student-led initiative, and the school installed 12-foot tall partitions to ensure privacy and security. To address concerns about fairness, a second all-gender restroom was later added on the same floor. Despite these efforts, the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights concluded that the bathrooms ran afoul of Title IX’s protections against sex-based discrimination.
Denver Public Schools, however, pushed back hard. In a statement, the district accused the Trump administration of using Title IX to promote an “anti-trans agenda.” The district further noted that the Education Department “did not cite any statutes or legal cases to back up its finding,” and pledged to support LGBTQ+ students, families, and their supporters. Denver officials also pointed out that, during the investigation, “no one came to look at the bathrooms or conduct interviews as part of the probe, and its attempts to discuss remedies were ignored.”
At stake for Denver is about $10 million a year in federal funding—a small fraction (less than 1%) of its $1.5 billion annual budget, according to the Associated Press. Still, the threat of funding cuts looms large, especially as the district considers whether to revert its two all-gender bathrooms back to traditional boys’ and girls’ restrooms. As of late August, no decision had been made.
The Denver case is far from isolated. According to The Hechinger Report, the Trump administration has launched about two dozen investigations into transgender policies in schools since taking office, focusing on issues like bathroom access, sports participation, and locker room use. Roughly half of these probes center at least in part on bathroom policies in K-12 districts across Virginia, Kansas, Washington state, and Colorado.
For supporters of the South Carolina and Denver policies, the issue is one of privacy, parental rights, and local control. They argue that schools must be allowed to set rules that reflect community standards and protect the privacy of all students. Opponents, including many civil rights advocates and LGBTQ+ organizations, counter that such rules single out and stigmatize transgender youth, violating federal law and constitutional protections.
Legal experts say the battle over school bathroom access is likely to continue for years, with the Supreme Court’s eventual decision in the South Carolina case potentially setting a national precedent. In the meantime, districts like Denver face tough choices—balancing federal mandates, local values, and the needs of a diverse student body.
As the new school year gets underway, students, parents, and educators across the country are watching closely. The outcome of these legal battles will shape not just restroom policies, but the broader climate of inclusion and respect in America’s schools for years to come.
