Legal
our schools are legal
AZ Now Allows Single Gender Schools
Sarah Buduson
Reporter, KPHO.com
PHOENIX -- Arizona now allows single gender public schools, after a new state law passed that says schools that accept public education funds can become all boys or all girls schools .
Prior to the passage of the new law, it was illegal for schools to accept only a single sex.
“We're really excited and really happy about the change,” said Linda Vollhein, CEO of Florence Crittenton of Arizona. Vollhein helped pass the law during the 2008-2009 legislative session. Her school will become the first single-gender charter school when it stops accepting boys next year.
Florence Crittenton of Arizona is a charter school for at-risk students who have fallen behind in their school work because of family problems or poor choices, including abuse, addiction, pregnancy and homelessness.
http://www.kpho.com/news/20220802/detail.html
Title IX Regulation Regarding the Implementation of Single-Sex Public Schools
"The Secretary amends the regulations implementing Title IX of
the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), which prohibits sex
discrimination in federally assisted education programs and activities.
These amendments clarify and modify Title IX regulatory requirements
pertaining to the provision of single-sex schools, classes,\1\ and
extracurricular activities in elementary and secondary schools. The
amendments expand flexibility for recipients to provide single-sex
education, and they explain how single-sex education may be provided
consistent with the requirements of Title IX."
(c) Schools. (1) General Standard. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, a
recipient that operates a public nonvocational elementary or secondary school that excludes
from admission any students, on the basis of sex, must provide students of the excluded sex
a substantially equal single-sex school or coeducational school.
http://www.ed.gov/policy/rights/reg/ocr/edlite-34cfr106.html#S34
UNITED STATES v. VIRGINIA et al.
certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fourth circuit
No. 94-1941. Argued January 17, 1996 -- Decided June 26, 1996
Justice Ginsberg in her opinion for the majority wrote, "Neither federal nor state government acts compatibly with equal protection when a law or official policy denies to women, simply because they are women, full citizenship stature--equal opportunity to aspire, achieve, participate in and contribute to society based on their individual talents and capacities. To meet the burden of justification, a State must show "at least that the [challenged] classification serves `important governmental objectives and that the discriminatory means employed' are `substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.' " Ibid., quoting Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Ins. Co., 446 U.S. 142, 150. The justification must be genuine, not hypothesized or invented post hoc in response to litigation. And it must not rely on overbroad generalizations about the different talents, capacities, or preferences of males and females. See, e.g., Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636, 643, 648. The heightened review standard applicable to sex based classifications does not make sex a proscribed classification, but it does mean that categorization by sex may not be used to create or perpetuate the legal, social, and economic inferiority of women. Pp. 13-16."
Read the full text of the VMI Decision at http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-1941.ZS.html
SAME, DIFFERENT, EQUAL: RETHINKING SINGLE-SEX SCHOOLING, by Rosemary C. Salomone. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2003. 287 pp. Cloth $29.95. ISBN: 0-300-09875-8.
http://www.kpho.com/news/20220802/detail.html