Several weeks ago in these pages, I called on North Carolina school boards to show courage in protecting girls in their schools. Across the state, too many boards have adopted policies — or tolerated practices — that allow biological males into girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms. In multiple districts, female students have reported biological males loitering in their private spaces and staring at them while they change, with school officials responding by telling the girls to simply “go somewhere else.”
That is not leadership. It is abdication.
In West Virginia v. B.P.J. and the companion Idaho case Little v. Hecox, decided June 30, 2026, the US Supreme Court upheld state laws barring biological males who identify as girls from participating in girls’ and women’s school sports teams. Justice Kavanaugh’s majority opinion made clear that Title IX’s reference to “sex” means biological sex. The court recognized that biological males generally possess inherent physical advantages in strength, speed, and endurance — advantages that persist even after puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones. These distinctions justify sex-based categories to ensure competitive fairness and physical safety for biological females.
While the rulings address athletics, their reasoning is directly applicable to the far more intimate and vulnerable settings of bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers. If biological sex is real and relevant enough to protect girls in sports, it is even more relevant where privacy, dignity, and protection from voyeurism and harassment are at stake.
The North Carolina General Assembly deserves credit for acting on sports. In 2023, it passed the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act (House Bill 574), which prohibits biological males from competing on girls’ and women’s teams in K-12 and collegiate athletics. That law remains in effect and aligns North Carolina with the approach now upheld by the Supreme Court in West Virginia and Idaho.
It is now time for the General Assembly to go even further and follow the lead of West Virginia and Idaho on facilities as well. Those states have enacted clear protections that keep biological males out of girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers in schools and other government settings.
North Carolina took an important step with House Bill 805, which took effect Jan. 1, 2026, by officially recognizing only two sexes and defining biological sex based on reproductive biology at birth. The General Assembly should build on that foundation by passing comprehensive, statewide legislation that protects girls’ intimate spaces in public schools.
For years, too many North Carolina school boards and officials have hidden behind the fear of litigation, more recently pointing to the Fourth Circuit’s 2020 decision in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board. In that case, a divided three-judge panel held that a school board policy requiring students to use restrooms corresponding to their biological sex violated Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause. It was a deeply flawed ruling from an activist court — one that elevated the demands of a tiny minority over the privacy, dignity, and safety of the vast majority of female students. School boards across North Carolina have repeatedly cited Grimm as justification for their inaction or for adopting policies that expose girls to unnecessary risk.
That decision, however, does not handcuff North Carolina school boards today. Grimm predates the Supreme Court’s recent rulings affirming that biological sex distinctions in school settings — particularly those made to protect females — are both lawful and often necessary. No court has ever held that school boards are prohibited from adopting policies that safeguard the privacy and safety of biological girls in bathrooms, locker rooms, and other intimate facilities. The recent Supreme Court decisions have only strengthened that authority.
More fundamentally, fear of being sued should never be the controlling factor when children’s safety and privacy are on the line. If an elected or appointed public official is so terrified of litigation that they will not take reasonable, lawful steps to protect minors from exposure or harassment in school bathrooms and locker rooms, that official has no business serving in office. Public service demands courage, not risk aversion, especially when action is needed to protect children. Put another way, if you’re afraid of getting sued, then don’t run for office.
North Carolina’s school boards now have both the legal cover and the moral duty to act.
Indeed, the moral duty to act and protect children was always there. These school board members are elected officials whose duty is to their constituents and to the children they were entrusted to protect — not to a 2-1 split decision by a Fourth Circuit panel involving a school in Virginia.
But now, there are no excuses.
No, not one.
North Carolina school boards that have not yet acted should immediately adopt clear, unambiguous policies: Only biological females may use girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers. Such policies align with the Supreme Court’s recognition of biological reality, directly address the privacy and safety failures that have occurred in schools across the state, and remove the dangerous ambiguity that has left girls vulnerable in their most private spaces.
Moreover, the North Carolina General Assembly should not leave this issue to local school boards alone. In many larger, left-leaning counties, school boards remain heavily influenced by woke ideologies and are unlikely to act on their own to protect girls in bathrooms and locker rooms. It is time for the legislature to follow the lead of West Virginia and Idaho by enacting clear, statewide protections for girls’ intimate spaces in public schools. Ambiguity endangers children. The General Assembly now has both the constitutional authority and fresh Supreme Court precedent to eliminate it.
North Carolina school boards that continue to resist these protections should take note. The Supreme Court has affirmed that biological sex is real and that protecting females in sex-segregated spaces is not only legitimate but necessary. There is no longer any credible legal basis to hide behind Title IX fears or outdated Fourth Circuit precedent. The question now is whether these boards will finally choose courage over political pressure and fear of lawsuits.
Now is the time to act.
