DOJ Sues Loudoun County School Board Over Transgender Policy Alleging Religious Discrimination

On December 8, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against the Loudoun County School Board in Virginia, alleging that the board's enforcement of Policy 8040 infringes upon the constitutional rights of two Christian male students at Stone Bridge High School. The policy permits transgender students to use facilities corresponding with their gender identity, a practice the DOJ contends led to religious discrimination against the students.

The lawsuit centers on an incident where a transgender female student accessed the boys' locker room, leading to discomfort among male students who cited religious objections. When two Christian students expressed their concerns, they were suspended and required to undergo a "Comprehensive Student Support Plan," actions the DOJ argues violate their First Amendment rights. This case highlights the ongoing national debate over balancing transgender rights with religious freedoms in educational settings.

Background on Policy 8040

Adopted on August 11, 2021, Policy 8040, titled "Rights of Transgender and Gender-Expansive Students," aims to provide an equitable, safe, and inclusive learning environment for all students. Key provisions include allowing students to use their chosen name and gender pronouns that reflect their consistently asserted gender identity without requiring substantiating evidence, permitting students to use restrooms and locker rooms corresponding to their consistently asserted gender identity, and enabling transgender and gender-expansive students to participate in school activities in a manner consistent with their gender identity. The policy aligns with the Virginia Department of Education's model policies for the treatment of transgender students.

Incident at Stone Bridge High School

The DOJ's lawsuit highlights an incident at Stone Bridge High School where a female student, under Policy 8040, entered the boys' locker room and recorded audio and video of male students. Two Christian male students expressed discomfort with this situation, citing religious beliefs that require them to use sex-segregated facilities. The school board suspended these students for ten days and mandated their participation in a "Comprehensive Student Support Plan," actions the DOJ argues violated their constitutional rights.

DOJ's Legal Arguments

The DOJ's lawsuit asserts that Loudoun County's enforcement of Policy 8040 infringes upon the First Amendment rights of religious students. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon stated, "Students do not shed their First Amendment rights at the schoolhouse gate. Loudoun County's decision to advance and promote gender ideology tramples on the rights of religious students who cannot embrace ideas that deny biological reality."

Loudoun County School Board's Response

Despite findings from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights that Loudoun County Public Schools violated Title IX by discriminating against male students, the Loudoun County School Board voted in August 2025 to maintain Policy 8040. The board stated that changing the policy would conflict with federal court precedent requiring schools to allow transgender students to use facilities matching their gender identity.

Broader Context and Implications

The lawsuit against Loudoun County is part of a broader national debate over transgender rights in schools. The Trump administration has taken legal action against various schools and universities over their gender policies, including banning transgender individuals from serving in the military and barring transgender girls and women from competing in women's sports.

In Virginia, Governor Glenn Youngkin's administration has issued new policies rolling back previous guidelines that supported accommodations for transgender students. These policies have faced legal challenges from organizations like the ACLU, which argue that they violate students' legal rights and perpetuate discrimination.

This case underscores the complex and evolving legal landscape surrounding the rights of transgender individuals and religious freedoms in educational settings. The outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications for school policies nationwide, as institutions strive to balance inclusivity with respect for diverse beliefs.