psycho-shower-scene-600

The U.S. Supreme Court decided Tuesday not to take a case against a Pennsylvania school district that secretly implemented a program allowing boys into the girls’ shower rooms.

The fight erupted when officials in the Boyertown Area School District in Pennsylvania allowed a boy who says he’s a girl to use the rest rooms and showers for girls based on his “gender identity.”

However, the district officials refused to let other students or their parents know that their privacy rights were being violated. Students who were were exposed to members of the opposite sex protested and eventually sued.

School officials told those protesting the change to get used to it.

The Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented the students, confirmed on Tuesday the court declined to take up the case.

The decision leaves standing a lower court ruling that the “Pennsylvania school district [can disregard] its students’ bodily privacy rights.”

“The Boyertown Area School District secretly implemented the policy during the 2016-17 school year,” ADF said. “Some male students learned about it only because they were undressing in their locker room and discovered that a female student was changing clothes with them. Embarrassed and confused, the students sought help from school officials, who told them they should just ‘tolerate it’ and ‘make it as natural as possible.’ One of those male students left the school entirely as a result.”

ADF Senior Counsel John Bursch said students “struggling with their beliefs about gender need compassionate support, but sound reasons based on common sense have always existed for schools to separate male and female teenagers in showers, restrooms, and locker rooms.”

“No student’s recognized right to bodily privacy should be made contingent on what other students believe about their own gender,” he said. “Because the 3rd Circuit’s decision made a mess of bodily privacy and Title IX principles, we believe the Supreme Court should have reviewed it. But we hope the court will take up a similar case in the future to bring much needed clarity to how the lower courts should handle violations of well-established student privacy rights.”

ADF explained the litigation is the result of the Obama administration’s “unilateral and extraordinary decision in 2016 to issue a written edict to public schools which, by fiat, interpreted Title IX’s sex discrimination provisions (‘no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity’) to require public schools to allow students to access bathrooms and locker rooms based on ‘an individual’s internal sense of gender.’

“As a result, transgenderism, also known as gender dysphoria, was read into a statute written solely to address sex, not gender identity. As a result, bathroom and locker room access in many public schools, including in the Boyertown Area School District, became based on subjective feelings, not objective facts or biology,” ADF explained.

President Trump immediately reversed Obama’s orders, but some school districts still are operating under the previous rules.

Scientifically it’s simple: Females are XX chromosomes and males XY. And that is unchangeable.

“These types of school policies have serious privacy implications,” said ADF Legal Counsel Christiana Holcomb earlier in the case. “Teenagers should not be forced to welcome members of the opposite sex into their showers, restrooms, or locker rooms based on what they believe about their gender. All schools, including Boyertown Area School District, should be providing support for those dealing with gender dysphoria, but they should seek to do so in ways that protect the privacy of all students.”

See a student’s perspective on the school’s policy:

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.