ACLU of Kentucky

A.N.A., et al. v. Breckinridge Co. Bd. of Education, et al.

United StatesDistrict Court

            This case is a direct challenge to the federal Dept. of Education’s 2006 regulations that expand the ability of public schools to segregate students on the basis ofsex.

            Prior to 2006, the Dept. of Education’s regulations interpreted Title IX as strictly prohibiting the implementation of educational programs on the basis of gender (except in very limited circumstances). The Dept. of Education issued new regulations in 2006, however, that allow schools to operate single-sex classes if: (1) their implementation is based upon an “important objective”; (2) they are administered in an“even handed manner”; and (3) participation is completely voluntary.

            At Breckinridge County Middle School, school officials began implementing single-sex classes in 2003 but allowed parents to “opt-out” of the classes and instead have their children attend co-ed classes.  At the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, however,school officials implemented the single-sex classes without notifying parents or providing them an opportunity to "opt-out.”  The parents initially retained private counsel and filed suit but subsequently discontinued their relationship with private counsel and sought ACLU assistance.

            In cooperation with the Women’s Rights Project, the ACLU of Kentucky assumed representation of the plaintiffs in Apr., 2008.  The plaintiffs then filed an Amended Complaint directly challenging the constitutionality of the 2006 regulations.  The plaintiffs’ primary claims are: (1) that the Dept. of Education’s 2006 regulations are unconstitutional because they allow schools to segregate students on the basis of gender without showing an “exceedingly persuasive justification” as required by the Equal Protection clause, (2) even if the regulations are constitutional, Breckinridge County Middle School’s single-sex plan does not comply with the 2006 regulations because students are not afforded a “substantially equal coeducational alternative” to the single-sex classes, and (3) because Breckinridge Middle receives federal funding from other governmental agencies (e.g. Dept. of Agriculture, Dept. of Health and Human Services), it is bound to follow those agencies’ regulations prohibiting sex-based discrimination (those agencies’ regulations mirror the Dept. of Education’s pre-2006 regulations and thus prohibit single-sex classes).

            In 2009, the parties engaged in extensive preliminary and discovery phase litigation.  With fact and expert discovery nearing completion, we will be engaging in substantive briefing of the legal/factual issues later this year.

Say v. Adams

United States District Court

            Here,we challenged an amendment to Ky.’s Concealed Deadly Weapon Permit law that required all applicants to be U.S. citizens.  We argued that the citizenship requirement violated the Equal Protection clause by discriminating on the basis of alienage.  In Mar., 2008, the Court granted our request for a preliminary injunction and ordered the Kentucky State Police to process our client’s CCDW permit application without regard to his status as a lawful U.S. resident (the client is a British national).

            In response to the Court’s ruling, the Ky. General Assembly repealed the citizenship requirement during the 2008 legislative session.  In June, 2008, the parties entered an agreed order converting the preliminary injunction into a permanent injunction and reserving the issue of attorney fees for further litigation.  After briefing, the Court granted (in part) our motion for attorney fees in Mar., 2009.  ACLU of Kentucky cooperating attorneys Jack Harrison, Ali Razzaghi and Patricia Foster worked with us on this case.