Loudoun County Schools Faces Escalated Legal Battle Over Transgender Locker Room Dispute

In a significant development in the ongoing controversy surrounding transgender bathroom policies in Virginia schools, the legal representatives of two boys suspended for questioning a transgender classmate’s use of the boys’ locker room have intensified their federal case against Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS). America First Legal and the Founding Freedoms Law Center filed an amended federal complaint on Wednesday, introducing fresh allegations and a new conspiracy charge. The complaint alleges that LCPS engaged in retaliatory actions against the boys and claims there were troubling inconsistencies in the district’s Title IX investigation that resulted in the boys being found guilty of sexual harassment and receiving 10-day suspensions. Ian Prior, Senior Counsel at America First Legal, expressed strong concerns about the school’s handling of the case, stating that the investigation “inexplicably relied on non-credible evidence, ignored credible witness testimony, failed to interview key witnesses, deleted potentially exonerating video evidence, and failed to disclose LCPS’s own admission that the allegations against our clients did not constitute sexual harassment.”

The controversy began earlier this year when LCPS initiated a Title IX sexual harassment investigation into the two high school boys after they were videotaped by a biological female who identified as transgender inside the boys’ locker room. The video captured them verbally expressing their discomfort about a biological girl who identified as a boy using their facilities. Initially, the boys and their parents attempted to appeal the district’s Title IX sexual harassment finding through administrative channels to prevent the suspensions and keep the harassment findings off their permanent records. However, when the district denied their appeal, the families took their case to federal court. The amended complaint filed Wednesday significantly escalates their legal challenge, introducing allegations not previously included in their original filing, including claims that the district conspired with a local political action committee called Loudoun for All to retaliate against the boys and their families.

Among the most serious new allegations is the claim that shortly after a federal court issued a preliminary injunction preventing LCPS from suspending the boys or including the Title IX findings in their student records, the district collaborated with Loudoun For All on press releases and messaging that included “false and defamatory allegations” designed to generate public opposition to the boys and their families. The complaint alleges that these materials, which appeared on various social media platforms and were cited in local media, contained privileged and confidential information related to the case. According to the complaint, Loudoun For All accused the parents of orchestrating “a coordinated campaign of disinformation, knowingly misrepresenting facts to fuel political outrage” and trying to “inflame voters ahead of an election.” The political action committee also claimed that 24 witnesses corroborated allegations that the boys called the transgender student derogatory names and told them to “get out” of the locker room – assertions that the boys’ legal team disputes.

The amended complaint further alleges significant procedural failures in the district’s investigation, including that LCPS failed to disclose that a video used as evidence against the boys included the transgender student saying “I got it” while laughing, suggesting the video was staged or taken under questionable circumstances. It also claims the district deleted other videos the transgender student had taken of boys using or coming out of the bathroom, which could have contained exonerating evidence. The complaint points out that despite inconsistencies in the transgender student’s account, Title IX investigators gave them “superior credibility” in their assessment. It also notes that a threat assessment conducted on the male students found no threat, and that the district had previously determined that similar situations did not constitute sexual harassment under federal law. When asked to comment, LCPS declined, citing its practice of not commenting on pending legal matters.

The case took another turn when the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found that LCPS had violated Title IX by discriminating against the boys on the basis of sex. Specifically, federal investigators determined that the district “failed to meaningfully investigate complaints of sexual harassment by two male students concerning the presence of a member of the opposite sex in male-only intimate spaces yet thoroughly investigated the female student’s sexual harassment complaint about the boys.” The parents of both boys told Fox News Digital in August that their sons had attempted to voice their discomfort to school officials about the female classmate using their locker room, but their complaints were ignored. This finding by the Department of Education added significant weight to the boys’ case and raised questions about the district’s handling of competing Title IX claims.

The Trump administration has taken a strong stance on the issue, indicating that LCPS would lose federal funding if it did not rescind its suspensions and sexual harassment findings against the two boys, review its initial findings, and investigate the Title IX complaint the boys filed against the transgender student for videotaping them in the locker room – a complaint the boys’ attorneys say was ignored by the district. Victoria Cobb, President of the Founding Freedoms Law Center, characterized the district’s investigation as a “sham targeting of these boys” while ignoring “numerous, credible threats to their privacy and safety.” She emphasized allegations that “a female student repeatedly filmed male students, including while using the bathroom, yet Loudoun did nothing.” The Trump administration has also included LCPS among five Northern Virginia school districts it has determined to be in violation of Title IX due to their locker room and bathroom policies. As a consequence, these districts’ federal funding will now be provided only through reimbursement, and the administration has initiated proceedings that could potentially terminate their funding altogether. This case highlights the complex and contentious intersection of transgender rights, student privacy, and educational policy that continues to challenge school districts across the country.