ETFOptimize | High-performance ETF-based Investment Strategies

Quantitative strategies, Wall Street-caliber research, and insightful market analysis since 1998.


ETFOptimize | HOME
Close Window

NCLA Says Spending Clause Clear Statement Rule Would Justify Reversing Title IX Girls’ Sports Case

Washington, DC, Sept. 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed an amicus curiae brief today in West Virginia v. B.P.J. at the U.S. Supreme Court. NCLA asked the Justices to respect the well-established rule that requires Congress to clearly state in advance any conditions it imposes on States for receiving federal funds. Hence, NCLA suggested the Court must recognize that, when Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of “sex,” it means biological sex. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in this case that West Virginia’s Save Women’s Sports Act, which prohibits biological males from competing on girls’ and women’s school sports teams, violated Title IX because it discriminates based on “gender identity.” In doing so, the Fourth Circuit stretched the meaning of Title IX to include gender identity, rather than protecting only against discrimination based on biological sex, as the States, Congress, and the general public would have understood at the time of Title IX’s enactment. NCLA’s brief asks the Supreme Court to reverse the Fourth Circuit’s error, which flies in the face of core constitutional principles.

Notably, the Fourth Circuit ignored the fact that Congress passed Title IX through its authority under the Spending Clause in Article I of the Constitution. Precedent requires Congress to clearly state any conditions it sets for States and their instrumentalities to receive federal funding. In Title IX’s text, Congress never indicated that the federal government could withhold education funding over matters of gender identity, only biological sex. By extending Title IX protections to gender identity, the Fourth Circuit impermissibly rewrote the statute, interpreting it far beyond its plain meaning and creating ambiguity where clarity had previously stood.  

The Fourth Circuit’s decision would effectively license Congress (and the courts) to subvert the clear statement rule and impose ambiguous conditions on States to receive federal funds, which undermines their ability to effectively govern education and many other core areas of public life. It would also empower executive agencies to exploit statutory ambiguity—though in this case there is none—enabling them to place conditions on federal funding to States in countless ways that Congress never clearly authorized. Such violations of federalism and separation-of-powers principles cannot be allowed to stand.

NCLA released the following statements:

“The Fourth Circuit’s misinterpretation of Title IX as encompassing gender identity—when it only prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex—essentially nullifies the clear statement rule, a vital constraint on Congress’s already broad power to legislate via conditions on its spending. The Supreme Court must reject this flawed reading of Title IX. If Congress wants to regulate in this area, it must at the very least do so clearly and unambiguously.”
— Andreia Trifoi, Staff Attorney, NCLA

“Title IX’s plain text protects women on the basis of sex—not gender identity—and the Fourth Circuit cannot conjure ambiguity in a statute that has long been clear to reach a policy outcome that Congress never enacted.”
— Casey Norman, Litigation Counsel, NCLA

“Title IX was passed under Congress’s Spending Clause authority, which implicates the clear statement rule. That means Congress had to put the States on notice before they accepted federal funding as to what they were agreeing to. But Congress never clearly stated the extension of Title IX to gender identity—and it could not have done so in 1972. This issue provides sufficient reason all by itself for the Supreme Court to reverse the Fourth Circuit.”
— Mark Chenoweth, President, NCLA

For more information visit the amicus page here.

ABOUT NCLA

NCLA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group founded by prominent legal scholar Philip Hamburger to protect constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State. NCLA’s public-interest litigation and other pro bono advocacy strive to tame the unlawful power of state and federal agencies and to foster a new civil liberties movement that will help restore Americans’ fundamental rights.

###


Joe Martyak
New Civil Liberties Alliance
703-403-1111
joe.martyak@ncla.legal
Stock Quote API & Stock News API supplied by www.cloudquote.io
Quotes delayed at least 20 minutes.
By accessing this page, you agree to the following
Privacy Policy and Terms Of Service.


 

IntelligentValue Home
Close Window

DISCLAIMER

All content herein is issued solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor should it be interpreted as a recommendation to buy, hold or sell (short or otherwise) any security.  All opinions, analyses, and information included herein are based on sources believed to be reliable, but no representation or warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, is made including but not limited to any representation or warranty concerning accuracy, completeness, correctness, timeliness or appropriateness. We undertake no obligation to update such opinions, analysis or information. You should independently verify all information contained on this website. Some information is based on analysis of past performance or hypothetical performance results, which have inherent limitations. We make no representation that any particular equity or strategy will or is likely to achieve profits or losses similar to those shown. Shareholders, employees, writers, contractors, and affiliates associated with ETFOptimize.com may have ownership positions in the securities that are mentioned. If you are not sure if ETFs, algorithmic investing, or a particular investment is right for you, you are urged to consult with a Registered Investment Advisor (RIA). Neither this website nor anyone associated with producing its content are Registered Investment Advisors, and no attempt is made herein to substitute for personalized, professional investment advice. Neither ETFOptimize.com, Global Alpha Investments, Inc., nor its employees, service providers, associates, or affiliates are responsible for any investment losses you may incur as a result of using the information provided herein. Remember that past investment returns may not be indicative of future returns.

Copyright © 1998-2017 ETFOptimize.com, a publication of Optimized Investments, Inc. All rights reserved.