{shortcode-b6e78aa67f7bdb302dc86f26d599127c9dec5751}

Harvard’s Title IX regulations are in limbo — and it’s because of a Kansas court injunction.

The Biden administration released updated Title IX regulations in April that held students to a lower standard of proof, eliminated the requirement for live hearings with cross-examination as part of campus disciplinary processes, and expanded the definition of “sex-based discrimination” to include gender identity — a move that sparked outrage and legal pushback from many conservatives.

Though the new Title IX rules were set to take effect last month, Harvard is still operating under the same set of interim regulations rolled out in 2020, which will stay in place until the Department of Education can enforce the new policy.

A Kansas District Court judge upheld an injunction filed by Alaska, Kansas, Utah, and Wyoming, as well as three conservative groups — Young America’s Foundation, Female Athletes United, and children of the members of Moms for Liberty — which prevents the Department of Education from enforcing the new Title IX regulations at not only institutions in the four states but also at schools attended by members of the three plaintiff groups or their children.

Harvard — along with over 700 other colleges and universities — is on this list.

Though the Kansas ruling does not appear to legally prevent Harvard from updating its Title IX rules, the University seems to be waiting for the legal challenge to conclude before finalizing its Title IX polices.

Erin Buzuvis, a professor at the Western New England University of Law, said in an interview that if “the current rule doesn’t conflict in any way with the past rule, there is no reason why an institution can’t comply with the new rule despite the injunction.”

Still, Harvard’s interim policy already offers increased protections to students beyond what is mandated by the 2020 Title IX guidelines as a result of the University’s compliance with Massachusetts state law, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity.

A Harvard spokesperson declined to comment for this article.

R. Shep Melnick ’73, a professor of American politics at Boston College, said in an interview that the Kansas injunction was unique in seeking to strike down the entire set of protections offered by the new Title IX regulations rather than targeting specific sections.

While “court decisions have all focused on the transgender issue,” he said, the injunction “applies to the whole kibosh.”

The new Title IX regulations have also been met with legal challenges in several other states, with the Supreme Court upholding injunctions from Louisiana and Kentucky. But only the Kansas injunction — with the clause about plaintiffs and their children — impacts Harvard.

Buzuvis and Melnick also pointed to the importance of the U.S. presidential elections later this year in determining the fate of the new Title IX regulations.

“It’s only dangerous if the administration changes hands,” Buzuvis said.

“If a Democratic president remains in charge, and the Department of Education continues on the same course, it will continue to press for the new rules to be implemented,” she added.

Melnick also said that the outcome of the November election would determine the future of the injunction and the new Title IX regulations.

“If Trump were to win the election, then he would try to undo the regulations anyway,” Melnick said.

—Staff writer Caroline K. Hsu can be reached at caroline.hsu@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @CarolineHsu_.

—Staff writer Hana Rostami can be reached at hana.rostami@thecrimson.com.