School Districts are Caving on Transgender Ideology

Event Information:

  • Wed

    AB 348 Hearing

    3:15 pmNevada Legislature 401 S Carson St, Carson City, NV 89701

    AB 348 would mandate the expansion of sex education for every public school in Nevada.  Every school district will be forced to adopt curriculum like the curriculum currently being considered in Washoe County School.

    This bill would expand the scope of what is being taught in sex education from health basics to the promotion of radical social issues including the affirmation of all sexual orientations and gender identities.

    This bill changes the sex education curriculum in Nevada from opt in to opt out, leading parents to receive less information about the curriculum, and those coming in to teach it. Nevada is one of the few states that currently respects parental rights by requiring parents to opt in to these classes, and now legislators want to take that away from us.
    If AB 348 passes, this statewide mandate will force all schools to:
    • promote abortion
    • inform students on where to obtain contraceptives without parental knowledge
    • promote dangerous sexual experimentation
    • promote gender fluidity, the idea that your gender is not decided by your biology but by your feelings
    • promote and affirm different sexual orientations

Do you believe public schools should allow students to use bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers based on their gender identity?

Some school districts in Nevada have caved to the pressure of the false assertion that Nevada schools must allow students to use bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers based on their gender identity, rather than their biological sex. This means biological boys in the girls’ facilities, and biological girls in the boys’.


Let me be clear: Nothing in law requires Nevada to perpetuate this violation of privacy.


Despite the facts, Clark County is still pushing forward with a policy promoting gender ideology in schools. They are considering policies similar to Washoe County allowing students to use bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers based on their gender identity, rather than their biological sex.


Any new policy must be one that protects the privacy of ALL students, rather than a select group. We are encouraging the board to adopt the Student Physical Privacy Policy (by Alliance Defending Freedom).


CCSD parents, teachers, residents, and students must demand that privacy for all students is protected. That is our job. We cannot let an out-of-control activist committee that is proposing these changes to the board control our schools.

No Federal or State law requires school districts to create a new and expanded policy on gender identity or ideology.

•Title IX – The regulations implementing Title IX, along with the majority of case law interpreting Title IX, explicitly permit school districts to regulate access to showers, locker rooms, and restroom based upon students’ biological sex without violating Title IX.

•SB 225 is not a mandate on local school districts. SB 225 mandates that the State Department of Education set guidelines for the training of school board members, teachers, and administrators to ensure all schools provide a safe and respectful learning environment. It does not force any district to implement any policy.

•Public Accommodation Law NRS651.070 – places of “public accommodation” include any establishment or place to which the public is invited or which is intended for public use. Places like schools, hotels, restaurants, bars, gas stations, casinos, theaters, retail stores, amusement parks, and zoos are examples of establishments covered by Nevada’s Public Accommodation Law. The statute does not mandate access to the private facilities within those establishments. Hotels, restaurants, and schools are intended for public use, however their restrooms and locker rooms are not.


No state law can strip students of their constitutional right to privacy.

Students have the fundamental right to bodily privacy and that right is clearly violated when students – much less kindergarteners – are forced into situations where members of the opposite sex may view their partially or fully unclothed bodies. No policy should force students into vulnerable interactions with the opposite-sex in restrooms, locker rooms, or over overnight accommodations.

Granting students access to opposite-sex changing areas could subject schools to tort liability for violating parents’ rights.

Parents have the fundamental right to control their children’s education and upbringing, including the extent of their children’s knowledge of the difference between the sexes.

Interaction between males and females in restrooms and locker rooms will necessarily result in students uncovering anatomical differences. These sensitive matters should be disclosed at home when parents deem appropriate, not ad-hoc in a school restroom.

Respecting such parental choices requires school districts to prohibit students from accessing restrooms and locker rooms dedicated to the opposite sex.

School districts have broad discretion to regulate the use of restrooms and similar facilities and to balance competing interests.

Public school districts enjoy broad authority and discretion in operating their schools. It should go without saying that this discretion includes regulating the use of school restrooms and similar facilities.

Under no circumstances should schools operate under the mistaken belief that federal law requires them to treat sex as irrelevant to the restroom, shower, or locker room that students may access.

Schools cannot command students to use words, pronouns, or engage in other expression that conflicts with their values and beliefs.

Unfortunately, school officials often trample students’ rights under the guise of attempting to prevent controversy and avoid offending other students. But this is not a permissible basis for compelling speech.

Parents and students alone have the right to determine what values are central to their lives. In the same manner, schools cannot command students to use words, pronouns, or engage in other expression that conflicts with their values and beliefs. To do so tramples students’ well-established rights and opens up schools to potential liability for infringing those rights.