SOUTH CAROLINA, Aug. 02, 2025
South Carolina is asking the Supreme Court to block a federal appeals court order that allows a transgender student to use boys’ bathrooms. The state argues this clashes with its law requiring facilities to align with biological sex, especially after the Court recently upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender treatments for minors.
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson believes the case will be a “death knell” for what he terms the “radical, hard-left agenda.”
- South Carolina has asked the Supreme Court to pause a ruling allowing a transgender student access to boys’ restrooms.
- The state law requires school facilities to be based on biological sex.
- The Supreme Court recently upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender transition treatments for minors.
- The Fourth Circuit ruled the student should be allowed to use the boys’ restroom pending the lawsuit.
In an emergency filing last week, Wilson and state officials stated the ruling left the Berkeley County School District “stuck between an impossible rock and hard place.”
“I believe that this case in the Fourth Circuit, that could ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, will be a death knell in that radical, hard-left agenda,” Wilson said in an interview. “This case is not only about the state’s ability to protect students’ privacy and safety, but it’s about the rights of the students themselves to be secure in their schools.”
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson suggests the Supreme Court should use the United States v. Skrmetti decision to overturn the Fourth Circuit’s ruling.
The State’s Argument
South Carolina argues that the Fourth Circuit’s decision heavily relies on the Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board case. In Grimm, the court found that barring a transgender boy from the boys’ restroom violated the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX.
However, South Carolina officials contend that Grimm is an outdated and “discredited outlier.” They want federal courts to align with the United States v. Skrmetti decision, which favored Tennessee’s ban on gender transition procedures for minors.
Activists gathered outside the U.S. Supreme Court on December 4, 2024, for the United States v. Skrmetti case.
“As both this Court and the Fourth Circuit have acknowledged, a primary reason for this biology-rooted convention is the promotion of privacy,” the filing states. “But recent social developments have sought to change that. Over the past fifteen years, the number of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria has skyrocketed.”
South Carolina’s law, enacted in July 2024, warns that school districts could lose 25% of their state Department of Education funding if they allow transgender students to use facilities different from their biological sex.
The student, identified as “John Doe,” and his parents initiated their lawsuit in November 2024.
In January, the Education Department under the Trump administration directed K-12 schools and colleges to interpret Title IX protections strictly based on biological sex. This reversed the Biden administration’s 2024 rule change, which had expanded the definition of “sex” to include gender identity and sexual orientation.
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson and state officials filed an emergency injunction seeking the Supreme Court’s intervention on a lower court ruling that permits a transgender boy to use the men’s restroom in the Berkeley County School District.
Student’s Legal Team Responds
Alexandra Zoe Brodsky, representing Doe, stated that South Carolina’s request for the Supreme Court to intervene in an ongoing lower court appeal is extraordinary. She added, “This case does not present the sort of emergency that would justify such intervention.”
“As the Chief Judge of the Fourth Circuit recently observed, ‘there’s zero evidence that [our client’s] use of boys’ restrooms presents even a remote possibility of harm to anyone. But the evidence of state hostility toward him overwhelms.’” Brodsky said. “Indeed, no classmate has ever complained about our client using boys’ restrooms. Yet South Carolina is rushing to the Supreme Court to get a permission slip to subject him to state-mandated discrimination at school, including the school discipline that drove him out of middle school last year.”
The Supreme Court might issue an emergency response as early as Friday. Such decisions can occur without full briefing or oral arguments.
