Idaho Can Restrict Transgender Students’ Restroom Use, Appeals Court Rules
上诉法院裁定：爱达荷州可限制跨性别学生使用洗手间
A federal appeals court has declined to block an Idaho law requiring public school students to use only the restroom and changing facilities corresponding to their “biological sex,” ruling that it likely does not violate the 14th Amendment’s equal-protection clause or Title IX.
联邦上诉法院拒绝阻止爱达荷州一项要求公立学校学生仅使用与其 “生理性别” 相符的洗手间和更衣设施的法律，并裁定该法律 likely 不违反美国宪法第十四修正案平等保护条款及《第九条》（Title IX）。
The decision is the latest development in a high-stakes national debate over the rights of transgender students and a reminder that the courts are weighing in even as the Trump administration has sought through executive orders and public statements to assert that there are only two sexes and that schools should not assist students’ gender transitions.
联邦上诉法院的这一裁决是美国国内围绕跨性别学生权利展开的高风险全国性辩论的最新进展，同时也表明：尽管特朗普政府曾通过行政命令和公开声明宣称 “性别仅有两种” 并主张学校不应协助学生进行性别转换，但法院仍在对相关争议进行司法权衡。
At least 11 states have such restroom bans in place, according to the Associated Press.
据美联社报道，至少 11 个州已实施此类洗手间使用禁令。
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, is notable because another panel of that court previously blocked a separate Idaho law that barred transgender athletes from women’s and girls’ sports.
在旧金山的美国第九巡回上诉法院，一个三人法官小组作出的一致裁决值得注意，因为该法院的另一个法官小组此前曾阻止爱达荷州一项禁止跨性别运动员参加女子和女童体育赛事的法律。
The court in that earlier case, in an opinion initially filed in 2023 but amended in 2024, said discrimination based on transgender status was a form of sex discrimination and that the sports law was likely unconstitutional. Proponents of the sports law have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
在 2023 年最初提交但 2024 年修正的一份意见中，该法院（指第九巡回上诉法院）在前述案件中指出，基于跨性别身份的歧视属于性别歧视的一种形式，且相关体育法可能违宪。该体育法的支持者已向美国最高法院提起上诉。
The new decision involves the 2023 Idaho law on restrooms and facilities, which was challenged by a transgender student identified in court papers as Rebecca Roe and the Sexuality and Gender Alliance at Boise High School.
新裁决涉及爱达荷州 2023 年出台的洗手间及设施使用法律，该法律由一名在法庭文件中名为丽贝卡・罗（Rebecca Roe）的跨性别学生及博伊西高中性与性别联盟（Sexuality and Gender Alliance at Boise High School）提出质疑。
A federal district court declined to block the law, though the 9th Circuit temporarily issued an injunction that kept it from taking effect during the 2023-24 school year.
联邦地区法院拒绝阻止该法律生效，尽管美国第九巡回上诉法院曾临时发布禁令，使其在 2023-24 学年期间未能实施。
Court lends credence to Idaho’s student privacy and safety goals
法院支持爱达荷州保障学生隐私与安全的目标
Under its March 20 decision in Roe v. Critchfield, the 9th Circuit panel agreed that the Idaho restroom and facilities law discriminates based on sex and transgender status. Thus, the law must survive a heightened level of judicial scrutiny to pass muster under the equal-protection clause, the panel said.
在 3 月 20 日对 “罗诉克里奇菲尔德案”（Roe v. Critchfield）的裁决中，美国第九巡回上诉法院法官小组认定，爱达荷州洗手间及设施使用法律构成基于性别和跨性别身份的歧视。该小组指出，因此，依据平等保护条款，该法律必须经受住更高程度的司法审查才能通过合宪性审查。
But the court concluded that Idaho met that burden because the law cites the legislature’s objectives as “protecting the privacy and safety of all students” specifically “in restrooms and changing facilities where such persons might be in a partial or full state of undress in the presence of others.”
但法院认定，爱达荷州满足了这一证明责任，因为该法律将立法机构的目标表述为 “保护所有学生的隐私与安全”，具体而言是 “在洗手间及更衣设施中 —— 在这些场所，人们可能会在他人面前处于部分或完全裸露的状态”。
The state has a substantial interest in “(1) not exposing students to the unclothed bodies of students of the opposite sex; and (2) protecting students from having to expose their own unclothed bodies to students of the opposite sex,” said the opinion by Judge Morgan Christen, an appointee of President Barack Obama. He was joined by Judges Kim McLane Wardlaw, a President Bill Clinton appointee, and Mark J. Bennett, a first-term appointee of President Donald Trump.
该州在 “（1）避免学生暴露于异性学生的裸露身体；（2）保护学生免于被迫向异性学生暴露自己的裸露身体” 方面具有重大利益，由巴拉克・奥巴马总统任命的摩根・克里森（Morgan Christen）法官在意见书中写道。与他共同署名的还有比尔・克林顿总统任命的金・麦克莱恩・沃德洛（Kim McLane Wardlaw）法官，以及唐纳德・特朗普总统首个任期内任命的马克・J・贝内特（Mark J. Bennett）法官。
This case was the “unusual situation in which the state’s privacy justification is easily corroborated by common experience and circuit precedent,” Christen said. “That some students in a state of partial undress may experience embarrassment, shame, and psychological injury in the presence of students of a different sex is neither novel nor implausible.”
克里森法官表示，本案属于 “州政府的隐私保护理由可通过普遍经验及巡回法院先例轻易佐证的不寻常情形”。他指出：“部分处于裸露状态的学生在异性学生面前可能感到尴尬、羞耻并遭受心理伤害，这既非新奇之事，也非不合常理。”
The court also declined to block the Idaho law as a violation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the federal law that bars sex discrimination in federally funded schools.
法院还拒绝以违反 1972 年《教育修正案》第九条（即禁止在接受联邦资助的学校中实施性别歧视的联邦法律）为由阻止爱达荷州的这项法律。
The court said it agreed that Idaho did not have adequate notice, when it accepted federal funds, “that Title IX prohibits the exclusion of transgender students from restrooms, locker rooms, shower facilities, and overnight lodging corresponding to their gender identity.”
法院表示，同意爱达荷州在接受联邦资金时，并未获得 “《第九条》禁止将跨性别学生排除在与其性别认同相符的洗手间、更衣室、淋浴设施及住宿设施之外” 的充分通知。
The panel gave a brief discussion in a footnote to the recent debate over conflicting interpretations of Title IX by the Biden administration’s 2024 final regulation, which sought to protect transgender students but was struck down by a federal district judge in January, and President Trump’s executive orders and other public statements seeking to limit transgender rights at school.
法官小组在脚注中简要讨论了近期围绕《第九条》（Title IX）的冲突性解释展开的辩论 —— 拜登政府 2024 年最终法规试图保护跨性别学生，但于 1 月被联邦地区法官驳回；而特朗普政府则通过行政命令及其他公开声明试图限制学生的跨性别权利。
“We express no opinion” on whether the Biden or Trump administration’s actions give notice to the states that a law such as Idaho’s excluding transgender students from facilities that “align with their gender identity” would violate Title IX, the court said.
法院表示，对于拜登政府或特朗普政府的行动是否向各州告知 “爱达荷州此类将跨性别学生排除在‘与其性别认同一致’的设施之外的法律会违反《第九条》”，“我们未发表意见”。
