Five-second answer

Claim we investigated

Students who objected to transgender athletes in girls' sports or locker rooms have faced school discipline or investigation in several documented cases, some ending in settlements or federal findings.

True. Settlements, court filings and federal findings document at least four cases since 2022; schools called some speech harassment. A Vermont settlement, a Virginia federal civil-rights finding and settlement, a California school district's admissions in court, and a federal finding against San José State each document students who objected and then faced discipline, investigation or orders to stop.

Quote or cite this fact-check

FactHub rates the claim “Students who objected to transgender athletes in girls' sports or locker rooms have faced school discipline or investigation in several documented cases, some ending in settlements or federal findings” True (high confidence): Settlements, court filings and federal findings document at least four cases since 2022; schools called some speech harassment. Reviewed October 23, 2026. https://facthub.org/n/article/students-disciplined-for-objecting/3

One-minute summary

What the evidence establishes

  • Established. Vermont, 2022: a high school volleyball player who objected to a transgender teammate in the girls' locker room was found to have committed gender-identity harassment and suspended for two days; the district settled for $125,000 in 2023 and cleared her records, admitting no wrongdoing.
  • Established. Virginia, 2025: two Loudoun County boys who complained about a transgender classmate in the boys' locker room were suspended for ten days; the Education Department found retaliation, a judge blocked the discipline, and the case settled in February 2026 on undisclosed terms.
  • Established. California, 2024: Riverside Unified admits in court that it told two runners to remove or conceal "Save Girls' Sports" shirts and warned of discipline for further violations; the case is pending.
  • Established. San José State: the Education Department found in January 2026 that the university subjected a volleyball player to a Title IX complaint for "misgendering"; SJSU disputes the findings.
  • Not shown. The Tumwater, Washington case is not confirmed by any school or federal record; the outcome comes from the student, whose mother has been paid $27,485 by I-638's sponsor.
  • Not shown. These cases do not show how often it happens or that the schools punished opinions rather than harassment; schools say they acted on harassment of specific students.
  • Context. The same disputes produced threats aimed at a transgender 14-year-old in Vermont and an investigation of a Utah girl's sex after rivals' parents complained.
  • Context. I-638 sets eligibility rules for girls' events; it does not regulate student speech, discipline or locker rooms.
Important context: Supporters of Washington Initiative IL26-638 (girls' sports) cite students who say they were punished for objecting to transgender athletes, including a Tumwater basketball player. We checked the claim our research can settle: whether such cases are documented. We sorted the cases into three tiers by the strength of the record (settled, adjudicated or formally found by a government agency; testimony; alleged or pending) and quote the primary documents. The schools involved say the speech they acted on was harassment of a specific student, and several outcomes were settlements without admission of wrongdoing. This is a handful of cases, not a measured rate. I-638 itself governs eligibility for girls' events and does not regulate student speech, discipline or locker rooms. No minors are named here.

The evidence

The conclusion rests on the combined record. Expand each item to see its role and limitations.

Independence note: This check uses 8 methods across 21 institutions and 1 country or international grouping.
Evidence map
Method Institution / country Year(s) What it shows Key limitation Primary links
Court records review: the family's sworn complaint and the reported settlement terms U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont, Orange Southwest School District, VTDigger United States 2022, 2023 In September 2022 a transgender 14-year-old on the Randolph Union High School girls' volleyball team used the girls' locker room, as state law and district policy allowed. A teammate said in a French class the next day that the transgender student "literally is a dude" who did not belong there. The school found her remarks were harassment based on gender identity and on October 21, 2022 imposed a two-day out-of-school suspension, a restorative circle and a reflective essay. Her father, a middle school coach, was suspended from coaching over a Facebook comment. The family sued in federal court on October 27, 2022. In May 2023 the district's insurer paid $125,000, the father was reinstated, and references to the discipline were removed from both records; the case was dismissed with prejudice. The complaint is the family's sworn account; the district never answered it because the case settled. The settlement document was not released; its terms come from news reports quoting it. The district admitted no wrongdoing and says its policies are unchanged. U.S. District Court, District of Vermont VTDigger (republished from the White River Valley Herald)
Federal agency finding plus court orders from the docket U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Loudoun Now United States 2025, 2026 In March 2025, boys at Stone Bridge High School objected to a transgender boy (a student born female) using the boys' locker room; the transgender student recorded them and filed a complaint. Loudoun County Public Schools found two boys responsible for sexual harassment and suspended them for ten days. On September 16, 2025 the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights found the district failed to respond to the boys' own complaints as Title IX requires and retaliated against them, and proposed rescinding the suspensions. On October 10, 2025 Judge Leonie Brinkema blocked enforcement of the discipline pending the case. The court recorded a settlement on February 13, 2026, and the boys dismissed their suit with prejudice on February 24, 2026. The Office for Civil Rights finding is an agency conclusion the district did not accept, issued by an administration that opposes gender-identity facility policies. The preliminary injunction is not a merits ruling, and the judge cited "significant weaknesses" in parts of the boys' case. The settlement terms are secret, so we cannot say whether the findings were withdrawn. The district's own Title IX case concluded the boys sexually harassed the transgender student. U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (plaintiffs' filing) Loudoun Now
Court records review: the school district's answer to the complaint U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Riverside Unified School District United States 2024, 2026 In fall 2024 two girls on Martin Luther King High School's cross-country team wore shirts reading "Save Girls' Sports" and "It's Common Sense. XX ≠ XY" after a transgender runner joined the girls' varsity team. In its June 5, 2026 answer in federal court, Riverside Unified admits the two were told to remove or conceal the shirts, citing a hostile environment; that an administrator compared the shirts to wearing a swastika around Jewish students; and that administrators said discipline could follow continued dress-code violations. The district says it allows student messages within recognized limits on school speech. The case is pending; the district denies most of the runners' other allegations, including that it acted unlawfully. Being told to change a shirt, with a warning, is a lesser measure than suspension. The court dismissed an earlier version of the suit as moot in February 2026 before the case continued. U.S. District Court, Central District of California (district's filing)
Findings by federal and state civil-rights investigators U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, San José State University, Roanoke College United States 2023, 2025, 2026 On January 28, 2026 the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights found that San José State, after a women's volleyball player joined a lawsuit against the NCAA, subjected her to a Title IX complaint for "misgendering" a transgender teammate in videos and interviews, and discouraged women from using the Title IX process. On August 25, 2025 the Virginia attorney general's civil-rights office found reasonable cause that Roanoke College retaliated against women swimmers who spoke out about a transgender teammate by rejecting them from May Term travel courses, while finding no hostile environment and no lost chance to compete. Both are investigators' findings, not court rulings, and both institutions reject them: SJSU refused the proposed agreement and sued the Education Department; Roanoke College calls the retaliation accusation "patently false." Both offices were led by officials who have publicly opposed transgender women competing in women's sports. Roanoke is retaliation by exclusion from courses, not discipline. U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Office of Civil Rights WDBJ7
Testimony to Congress U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Independent Women's Voice United States 2023 Riley Gaines, a former Kentucky swimmer who tied Lia Thomas at the 2022 NCAA championships, told the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 21, 2023 that female athletes around the country who protested Thomas's inclusion "were threatened, intimidated, and emotionally blackmailed into silence and submission." The passage is a general statement with no school, person or date, so it cannot be checked or counted as a case. Gaines is an advocate and a litigant on this issue. We could not confirm whether the witnesses were sworn; false statements to Congress are a crime either way. (The Vermont complaint above is also sworn, but it is a party's pleading.) U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Complaints and filings by one side, checked against later records Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism, Washington Public Disclosure Commission, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, KIRO Newsradio United States 2022, 2025, 2026 Tumwater: at a February 6, 2025 junior varsity basketball game, a 15-year-old Tumwater High School player sat out rather than play against a transgender girl on the opposing team and objected from the sideline. A February 17, 2025 complaint to the Office for Civil Rights by the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism says the district then opened a bullying-and-harassment investigation of her for "misgendering." The Education Department opened an investigation of the district in March 2025; we found no resolution. In a September 2026 radio interview, the student said the school warned her of "progressive consequences." Washington Public Disclosure Commission records show Let's Go Washington paid her mother $27,485.32 in 13 payments (wages and mileage) from April 30 to September 29, 2026 (our sum). Penn: three former Penn swimmers allege administrators told them that speaking publicly would taint them "with transphobia" and cost them jobs; the court stayed their case in July 2025. Neither outcome is confirmed by the school, a court or the Education Department. The Tumwater account comes from an advocacy group's complaint and from the student; the district's notice attached to the complaint is an unreadable image. Let's Go Washington, the I-638 sponsor, has paid the student's mother since April 2026. The Penn allegations are untested while the case is stayed. Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism (FAIR) MyNorthwest (KIRO Newsradio) Washington Public Disclosure Commission (via data.wa.gov) U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (plaintiffs' filing) CourtListener (RECAP docket)
Appellate court opinions U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit United States 2024, 2025 On November 6, 2025 the full Sixth Circuit ordered an injunction barring an Ohio district from punishing students for using pronouns that match a classmate's sex, holding the district showed no disruption or harassment under the Tinker standard, while adding that schools may still enforce anti-harassment rules to protect transgender students. In 2024 the First Circuit upheld a Massachusetts middle school's ban on a 12-year-old's "There Are Only Two Genders" shirt, and the Supreme Court declined to review that ruling in May 2025. Whether a school may discipline a student for this kind of speech depends on the facts and the circuit. Neither circuit covers Washington, and neither case involved sports. Olentangy is a preliminary ruling decided 10-7. The Supreme Court has not decided the question. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Officials' statements reported in news coverage Orange Southwest School District, Utah High School Activities Association, CBS News, VTDigger United States 2022, 2025 After the Vermont locker-room story spread nationally in 2022, the district's website was defaced, its voicemail and email filled with threats, and the superintendent said the FBI was investigating; the student at the center was a transgender 14-year-old. In Loudoun County, the district's Title IX process found the boys had sexually harassed the transgender student. In Utah, the high school athletic association confirmed in 2022 that a complaint from the parents of the second- and third-place finishers led it to check a winning girl's school records back to kindergarten to see whether she was female, without her family's knowledge. Neither episode was adjudicated or settled, so these are less formally documented than the Tier 1 cases; we found no case of a transgender student's harassment in a sports dispute that ended in a settlement or federal finding. The Vermont threats were aimed at the school, mostly from outside the state, per the superintendent. The Utah girl was not transgender. VTDigger U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights CBS News
1. Tier 1, settled: Vermont volleyball locker-room case (2022-2023) Court records review: the family's sworn complaint and the reported settlement terms

In September 2022 a transgender 14-year-old on the Randolph Union High School girls' volleyball team used the girls' locker room, as state law and district policy allowed. A teammate said in a French class the next day that the transgender student "literally is a dude" who did not belong there. The school found her remarks were harassment based on gender identity and on October 21, 2022 imposed a two-day out-of-school suspension, a restorative circle and a reflective essay. Her father, a middle school coach, was suspended from coaching over a Facebook comment. The family sued in federal court on October 27, 2022. In May 2023 the district's insurer paid $125,000, the father was reinstated, and references to the discipline were removed from both records; the case was dismissed with prejudice.

Limit: The complaint is the family's sworn account; the district never answered it because the case settled. The settlement document was not released; its terms come from news reports quoting it. The district admitted no wrongdoing and says its policies are unchanged.

Verify: Verified complaint, No. 2:22-cv-197 (D. Vt.), filed October 27, 2022 Orange Southwest reaches settlement in [family name omitted] lawsuit

2. Tier 1, federal finding and settlement: Loudoun County, Virginia boys' locker room (2025-2026) Federal agency finding plus court orders from the docket

In March 2025, boys at Stone Bridge High School objected to a transgender boy (a student born female) using the boys' locker room; the transgender student recorded them and filed a complaint. Loudoun County Public Schools found two boys responsible for sexual harassment and suspended them for ten days. On September 16, 2025 the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights found the district failed to respond to the boys' own complaints as Title IX requires and retaliated against them, and proposed rescinding the suspensions. On October 10, 2025 Judge Leonie Brinkema blocked enforcement of the discipline pending the case. The court recorded a settlement on February 13, 2026, and the boys dismissed their suit with prejudice on February 24, 2026.

Limit: The Office for Civil Rights finding is an agency conclusion the district did not accept, issued by an administration that opposes gender-identity facility policies. The preliminary injunction is not a merits ruling, and the judge cited "significant weaknesses" in parts of the boys' case. The settlement terms are secret, so we cannot say whether the findings were withdrawn. The district's own Title IX case concluded the boys sexually harassed the transgender student.

Verify: U.S. Department of Education Concludes Loudoun County Public Schools Violated Title IX and Retaliated Against Male Students Amid Sexual Harassment Claims Order granting preliminary injunction, S.W. v. Loudoun County School Board, No. 1:25-cv-1536 (E.D. Va. Oct. 10, 2025) Notice of dismissal, S.W. v. Loudoun County School Board, No. 1:25-cv-1536 (E.D. Va. Feb. 24, 2026) Federal lawsuit on Stone Bridge locker room case ends in settlement

3. Tier 1, admitted in court (case pending): Riverside, California "Save Girls' Sports" shirts (2024) Court records review: the school district's answer to the complaint

In fall 2024 two girls on Martin Luther King High School's cross-country team wore shirts reading "Save Girls' Sports" and "It's Common Sense. XX ≠ XY" after a transgender runner joined the girls' varsity team. In its June 5, 2026 answer in federal court, Riverside Unified admits the two were told to remove or conceal the shirts, citing a hostile environment; that an administrator compared the shirts to wearing a swastika around Jewish students; and that administrators said discipline could follow continued dress-code violations. The district says it allows student messages within recognized limits on school speech.

Limit: The case is pending; the district denies most of the runners' other allegations, including that it acted unlawfully. Being told to change a shirt, with a warning, is a lesser measure than suspension. The court dismissed an earlier version of the suit as moot in February 2026 before the case continued.

Verify: Riverside Unified School District's answer to second amended complaint, T.S. v. Riverside Unified School District, No. 5:24-cv-02480 (C.D. Cal. June 5, 2026)

4. Tier 1, government findings (contested): San José State and Roanoke College Findings by federal and state civil-rights investigators

On January 28, 2026 the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights found that San José State, after a women's volleyball player joined a lawsuit against the NCAA, subjected her to a Title IX complaint for "misgendering" a transgender teammate in videos and interviews, and discouraged women from using the Title IX process. On August 25, 2025 the Virginia attorney general's civil-rights office found reasonable cause that Roanoke College retaliated against women swimmers who spoke out about a transgender teammate by rejecting them from May Term travel courses, while finding no hostile environment and no lost chance to compete.

Limit: Both are investigators' findings, not court rulings, and both institutions reject them: SJSU refused the proposed agreement and sued the Education Department; Roanoke College calls the retaliation accusation "patently false." Both offices were led by officials who have publicly opposed transgender women competing in women's sports. Roanoke is retaliation by exclusion from courses, not discipline.

Verify: U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights Finds San José State University Violated Title IX U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights Issues Letter of Impending Enforcement to San Jose State University on Title IX Compliance Final determination: finding of reasonable cause, Commonwealth of Virginia v. Roanoke College, OCR Case Nos. 2023-ED0109, 2024-ED0138, 2024-ED0139 (Aug. 25, 2025) Roanoke College responds to Miyares’ report of discrimination against female athletes

5. Tier 2, testimony: Riley Gaines to the Senate Judiciary Committee (2023) Testimony to Congress

Riley Gaines, a former Kentucky swimmer who tied Lia Thomas at the 2022 NCAA championships, told the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 21, 2023 that female athletes around the country who protested Thomas's inclusion "were threatened, intimidated, and emotionally blackmailed into silence and submission."

Limit: The passage is a general statement with no school, person or date, so it cannot be checked or counted as a case. Gaines is an advocate and a litigant on this issue. We could not confirm whether the witnesses were sworn; false statements to Congress are a crime either way. (The Vermont complaint above is also sworn, but it is a party's pleading.)

Verify: Testimony of Riley Gaines, Advisor, Independent Women's Voice, June 21, 2023

6. Tier 3, alleged or pending: Tumwater, Washington and the Penn swimmers Complaints and filings by one side, checked against later records

Tumwater: at a February 6, 2025 junior varsity basketball game, a 15-year-old Tumwater High School player sat out rather than play against a transgender girl on the opposing team and objected from the sideline. A February 17, 2025 complaint to the Office for Civil Rights by the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism says the district then opened a bullying-and-harassment investigation of her for "misgendering." The Education Department opened an investigation of the district in March 2025; we found no resolution. In a September 2026 radio interview, the student said the school warned her of "progressive consequences." Washington Public Disclosure Commission records show Let's Go Washington paid her mother $27,485.32 in 13 payments (wages and mileage) from April 30 to September 29, 2026 (our sum). Penn: three former Penn swimmers allege administrators told them that speaking publicly would taint them "with transphobia" and cost them jobs; the court stayed their case in July 2025.

Limit: Neither outcome is confirmed by the school, a court or the Education Department. The Tumwater account comes from an advocacy group's complaint and from the student; the district's notice attached to the complaint is an unreadable image. Let's Go Washington, the I-638 sponsor, has paid the student's mother since April 2026. The Penn allegations are untested while the case is stayed.

Verify: Civil rights complaint to the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights against Tumwater School District, February 17, 2025 ‘There was a man in my locker room’: Tumwater athlete vows to keep fighting for girls sports Expenditures by Candidates and Committees (dataset tijg-9zyp), Let's Go Washington payments, April 30 to September 29, 2026 Complaint, Estabrook v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, No. 1:25-cv-10281 (D. Mass., filed Feb. 4, 2025) Docket, Estabrook v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, No. 1:25-cv-10281 (D. Mass.)

7. The law is split: Sixth Circuit (2025) versus First Circuit (2024) Appellate court opinions

On November 6, 2025 the full Sixth Circuit ordered an injunction barring an Ohio district from punishing students for using pronouns that match a classmate's sex, holding the district showed no disruption or harassment under the Tinker standard, while adding that schools may still enforce anti-harassment rules to protect transgender students. In 2024 the First Circuit upheld a Massachusetts middle school's ban on a 12-year-old's "There Are Only Two Genders" shirt, and the Supreme Court declined to review that ruling in May 2025. Whether a school may discipline a student for this kind of speech depends on the facts and the circuit.

Limit: Neither circuit covers Washington, and neither case involved sports. Olentangy is a preliminary ruling decided 10-7. The Supreme Court has not decided the question.

Verify: Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District Board of Education, No. 23-3630 (6th Cir. Nov. 6, 2025) (en banc) L.M. v. Town of Middleborough, No. 23-1535 (1st Cir. June 2024), 103 F.4th 854

8. The other side: threats and scrutiny aimed at students in the same disputes Officials' statements reported in news coverage

After the Vermont locker-room story spread nationally in 2022, the district's website was defaced, its voicemail and email filled with threats, and the superintendent said the FBI was investigating; the student at the center was a transgender 14-year-old. In Loudoun County, the district's Title IX process found the boys had sexually harassed the transgender student. In Utah, the high school athletic association confirmed in 2022 that a complaint from the parents of the second- and third-place finishers led it to check a winning girl's school records back to kindergarten to see whether she was female, without her family's knowledge.

Limit: Neither episode was adjudicated or settled, so these are less formally documented than the Tier 1 cases; we found no case of a transgender student's harassment in a sports dispute that ended in a settlement or federal finding. The Vermont threats were aimed at the school, mostly from outside the state, per the superintendent. The Utah girl was not transgender.

Verify: Randolph community discusses high school controversy at public forum U.S. Department of Education Concludes Loudoun County Public Schools Violated Title IX and Retaliated Against Male Students Amid Sexual Harassment Claims Utah investigates winning student-athlete's gender after parents of second- and third-place finishers submit complaints

Common questions

“These students were punished only for their opinions.”

Short answer: Disputed

The record shows objection followed by discipline, not why each school acted. Vermont and Loudoun found harassment of an identifiable classmate; Riverside said the shirts created a hostile environment. Settlements ended the Vermont and Loudoun cases without findings, the Loudoun judge noted weaknesses in the boys' allegations, and the Sixth Circuit said schools may still punish real harassment of transgender students. Federal civil-rights investigators reached the opposite view in Loudoun and at San José State.

“Schools routinely punish girls who speak up about transgender athletes.”

Short answer: Not shown

We found a handful of well-documented cases nationwide since 2022, not a rate, and none adjudicated in Washington. General statements, such as Riley Gaines's Senate testimony that protesters were "intimidated" into silence, name no cases and cannot be counted.

“A Tumwater, Washington player was punished for objecting to a transgender opponent.”

Short answer: Unconfirmed

An investigation is alleged in an advocacy group's complaint to the Education Department, and the student says she was warned of "progressive consequences." We found no district record, court filing or Office for Civil Rights resolution confirming an outcome. Let's Go Washington, the I-638 sponsor, paid the student's mother $27,485.32 in wages and mileage from April 30 to September 29, 2026, according to its own PDC reports; the committee also backs two other measures.

Related claim: Individuals fund most of I-638's Yes side; a foundation and unions fund No. — Who funds each side of I-638, from PDC records: individuals other than Brian Heywood supply most of the Yes money; a foundation and unions supply most of the No money.

“Only the students who objected have been harmed in these disputes.”

Short answer: No

In Vermont the national attention brought threats that the FBI investigated, centered on a transgender 14-year-old, and in Utah a girl was investigated over her sex because rivals' parents complained. These are documented by officials' statements, though none ended in a settlement or finding.

“Passing I-638 would stop schools from disciplining students for this kind of speech.”

Short answer: No

I-638 sets who may compete in girls' events and how sex is verified. It does not change school speech or harassment rules or address locker rooms. Its only change to the state sex-equity law is an exception for athletics; the harassment-policy section is unchanged. What schools may discipline is governed by the First Amendment, and appeals courts disagree.

Related claim: Washington's rules let transgender girls compete in girls' school sports. — Washington's current rules (WIAA Rule 18.16.0 and OSPI) let students compete by gender identity, including transgender girls in girls' events; the Yes claim that Washington "currently allows males to compete against girls" rates True.

“The federal findings are politics, not evidence.”

Short answer: Partly

The Office for Civil Rights findings come from an administration that opposes gender-identity sports and facility policies, and both SJSU and Loudoun rejected them. But they rest on records the institutions have not shown to be wrong, and the Loudoun discipline was also blocked by a federal judge who was critical of parts of the boys' case.

Conclusion

The claim holds. At least four cases are documented by records that do not depend on the students' own accounts. In Vermont (2022), a high school volleyball player who said in class that a transgender teammate "literally is a dude" and did not belong in the girls' locker room was found to have committed harassment based on gender identity and given a two-day suspension; the district settled in 2023 for $125,000 and agreed to clear the discipline from her records, while admitting no wrongdoing. In Loudoun County, Virginia (2025), two boys who complained about a transgender classmate in the boys' locker room were found responsible for sexual harassment and suspended for ten days; the U.S. Education Department's Office for Civil Rights found the district had retaliated against them, a federal judge blocked the discipline, and the case settled in February 2026 on undisclosed terms. In Riverside, California (2024), the school district admits in its court answer that two cross-country runners were told to remove or conceal "Save Girls' Sports" shirts, that an administrator compared the shirts to a swastika, and that students were told discipline could follow further violations; that case is pending. At San José State, the Office for Civil Rights found in January 2026 that the university subjected a women's volleyball player to a Title IX complaint for "misgendering" a teammate; SJSU disputes the findings and has sued. A fifth case, Roanoke College, is a state finding of retaliation by exclusion from study-abroad courses rather than discipline, and the college calls it false. The weaker tiers add texture but not proof. Riley Gaines told the Senate in 2023 that protesting athletes were "threatened, intimidated, and emotionally blackmailed into silence," but named no specific case. The former Penn swimmers allege administrators warned them that speaking out would cost them jobs; that suit is stayed. The Tumwater case, the one closest to Washington voters, rests on an advocacy group's complaint to the Education Department and on the student's own account: the complaint says the district opened a bullying-and-harassment investigation, and the student says she was warned of "progressive consequences." We found no district record or Office for Civil Rights resolution confirming the outcome. Readers should also know that Let's Go Washington, which sponsors I-638, paid the student's mother $27,485.32 in wages and mileage from April through September 2026, according to its own reports to the Public Disclosure Commission. The main limit is what the record cannot settle: whether each school punished an opinion or punished harassment. In Vermont and Loudoun the schools found harassment of an identifiable classmate, and the Loudoun judge noted "significant weaknesses" in parts of the boys' allegations. Settlements end cases without findings either way, and the federal findings come from an administration that has taken a public position on these policies. The law is also unsettled: the full Sixth Circuit held in November 2025 that an Ohio district likely cannot punish students for using pronouns that match a classmate's sex, while the First Circuit upheld a Massachusetts school's ban on a "There Are Only Two Genders" shirt and the Supreme Court declined to review it. Neither court covers Washington. The record also shows harm running the other way. After the Vermont dispute became national news, the district's website was defaced, its voicemail filled with threats, and the FBI investigated; the person at the center was a 14-year-old transgender girl. In Utah, rival parents' complaints led the state athletic association to investigate whether a girl who won an event was female, checking her school records back to kindergarten without telling her family. We found no case on the transgender-student side that was settled or formally adjudicated in the same way, but these episodes are documented by officials' own statements. We rate the claim True with high confidence because each element (objection, then discipline, investigation or an order to stop; settlements; federal findings) is shown by court records, government findings or a school district's own admissions. What remains unproven is how often this happens: we found a handful of cases nationwide, not a rate, and none adjudicated in Washington.

How we checked

  1. Defined the claim as: students who objected to transgender athletes in girls' sports or to transgender students in locker rooms later faced school discipline, investigation, an order to stop, or retaliation, in cases documented by records; and some of those cases ended in settlements or federal findings.
  2. Started from cases cited by advocates on both sides and searched court dockets (CourtListener/PACER), Education Department press releases, state civil-rights offices and news archives for 2022 to October 2026.
  3. For each case, read the primary documents: complaints, answers, orders, dismissal notices, agency findings and testimony. We quote them exactly and give each outcome and its date.
  4. Sorted cases into three tiers: (1) settled, adjudicated, admitted by the school in court, or formally found by a government agency; (2) testimony; (3) alleged or pending. We did not count advocacy-outlet stories unless a filing, school record or independent report matched them.
  5. Looked equally for documented cases on the other side (transgender students harassed or punished in these disputes) and included those documented by officials.
  6. Re-verified the Tumwater family's payments from Let's Go Washington on the Public Disclosure Commission dataset (data.wa.gov, tijg-9zyp) on October 23, 2026, and summed the 13 itemized payments ourselves.
  7. Did not name any minor or student who was a minor at the time. Recorded limits for each case, including who issued each finding and what each settlement left unresolved.

Editorial note: Scope: cases in U.S. schools and colleges, 2022 to October 2026, where a student who objected to a transgender athlete's participation or locker-room access then faced discipline, investigation, an order to stop, or retaliation, plus documented cases of transgender students harmed in the same disputes. Staff and parents who objected are outside the count. We do not name minors, including students who were minors at the time, even when news coverage or court captions did. Accounts from advocacy outlets were used only where a filing, school record or independent report matched them. Several U.S. Education Department pages block automated access; we cite them with archived copies. FactHub takes no position on I-638. No external specialist review has been recorded.

Expert-review status

No external specialist review has been recorded.

Funding and conflicts

Funding: No external funding for this piece.

Ownership: Published by the FactHub Research Team.

Conflicts: None known.

Sources

Sources are labeled by kind, with what this fact check takes from each, so readers can check the evidence independently.

  1. Party to the dispute U.S. District Court, District of Vermont. Verified complaint, No. 2:22-cv-197 (D. Vt.), filed October 27, 2022

    The sworn (verified) complaint a Randolph, Vermont, family filed against the Orange Southwest School District and its officials over discipline that followed a dispute about a transgender student in the girls' volleyball locker room.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Filed by the family, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, which advocates against gender-identity policies in schools. A verified complaint is sworn but one-sided; the district never answered it because the case settled.

    • The school found that the student's reference to the transgender student as a male, made in a class the transgender student did not attend, was harassment based on gender identity.

      What the source says
      finding that her reference to T.S. as a male constituted "harassment on the basis of gender identity."
      Introduction, para. 4, p. 3

    • The October 21, 2022 notice imposed a two-day out-of-school suspension, a restorative circle and a reflective essay.

      What the source says
      In addition to the two-day out-of-school suspension, the October 21 notification advised
      Para. 114, p. 18
  2. News report VTDigger (republished from the White River Valley Herald). Orange Southwest reaches settlement in [family name omitted] lawsuit

    News report, June 2, 2023, on the settlement of the Vermont locker-room lawsuit, with statements from the superintendent and the family's lawyers.

    Reliability: Nonprofit Vermont news site. The settlement text itself was not released by the district; the report quotes its language and both sides.

    • The case settled for $125,000, the coach-father was reinstated, and both records were cleared of the discipline; the suit was dismissed with prejudice.

      What the source says
      The settlement calls for a $125,000 payment to the…their attorneys, reinstates…as middle school soccer coach and scrubs the records of…of any reference to the discipline.
      Paragraph 1

    • Qualifies: The district admitted no wrongdoing, said its insurer paid to cap defense costs, and kept its policies unchanged.

      What the source says
      “The district has made no admission of wrongdoing. Our policies are unchanged and we will continue to comply with our policies and the law.”
      Superintendent's statement · Layne Millington, superintendent, Orange Southwest Supervisory District
  3. News report VTDigger. Randolph community discusses high school controversy at public forum

    News report, October 14, 2022, on a Randolph community forum after national coverage of the volleyball locker-room dispute.

    Reliability: Nonprofit Vermont news site. The threat details come from the superintendent, who played voicemails at the forum.

    • Qualifies: After the story spread nationally, the school received threatening messages, many of them hostile to transgender people.

      What the source says
      the school’s voicemail and email has been turned into a cesspool of transphobic threats
      Body, middle

    • Qualifies: The superintendent said the FBI was investigating the messages and the defacement of the district website.

      What the source says
      All of the messages and actions are now being investigated by the FBI, Millington said.
      Body, middle
  4. Government U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. U.S. Department of Education Concludes Loudoun County Public Schools Violated Title IX and Retaliated Against Male Students Amid Sexual Harassment Claims Free copy

    Press release, September 16, 2025, announcing the Office for Civil Rights finding against Loudoun County Public Schools (Virginia) and the resolution agreement it proposed.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. The current Education Department holds that Title IX requires sex-separated facilities and states that view in the release. The district did not sign the agreement; a finding is an agency conclusion, not a court ruling.

    • OCR found the district failed to respond to the boys' locker-room complaints as Title IX requires and retaliated against them.

      What the source says
      OCR concluded that Loudoun County failed to respond as required by Title IX to reports of sexual harassment in the boys’ locker room at a Loudoun County school and retaliated against male students
      Paragraph 1

    • OCR's proposed agreement required the district to rescind the two boys' suspensions.

      What the source says
      Rescind the suspensions imposed on the two male students
      Resolution agreement terms

    • Qualifies: The district had investigated the transgender student's own sexual harassment complaint against the boys.

      What the source says
      yet thoroughly investigated the female student’s sexual harassment complaint about the boys
      Paragraph 1
  5. Government U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia. Order granting preliminary injunction, S.W. v. Loudoun County School Board, No. 1:25-cv-1536 (E.D. Va. Oct. 10, 2025)

    One-page order by Judge Leonie Brinkema blocking the school board from enforcing the boys' discipline while the case proceeded, conditioned on a $125,000 bond.

    Reliability: A federal court order. It is a preliminary ruling, not a decision on the merits, and the judge noted weaknesses in the boys' case.

    • The court barred the board from enforcing the discipline against either boy until further order.

      What the source says
      defendant is prohibited from enforcing the disciplinary measures at issue as to either plaintiff until the Court orders otherwise
      Order, p. 1

    • Qualifies: The judge required a bond because of significant weaknesses in parts of the boys' allegations.

      What the source says
      specifically the significant weaknesses in aspects of plaintiffs' allegations
      Order, p. 1
  6. Party to the dispute U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (plaintiffs' filing). Notice of dismissal, S.W. v. Loudoun County School Board, No. 1:25-cv-1536 (E.D. Va. Feb. 24, 2026)

    The boys' notice dismissing their suit with prejudice after the court recorded on February 13, 2026 that the case had settled.

    Reliability: A routine court filing by the plaintiffs' lawyers (America First Legal and Founding Freedoms Law Center). It records the settlement but not its terms.

    • The court recorded the case as settled on February 13, 2026, and the boys dismissed it with prejudice.

      What the source says
      the Minute Entry made on February 13, 2026, identifying the case settled
      p. 1
  7. News report Loudoun Now. Federal lawsuit on Stone Bridge locker room case ends in settlement

    Local news report, February 27, 2026, on the settlement of the Stone Bridge High School locker-room case.

    Reliability: Nonprofit Loudoun County news site. It reports both sides; the district declined to comment.

    • Qualifies: The settlement terms were not disclosed, so it is unknown whether the suspensions or findings were withdrawn.

      What the source says
      The terms have not been disclosed.
      Paragraph 2
  8. Party to the dispute U.S. District Court, Central District of California (district's filing). Riverside Unified School District's answer to second amended complaint, T.S. v. Riverside Unified School District, No. 5:24-cv-02480 (C.D. Cal. June 5, 2026)

    The school district's answer in a pending federal suit by two cross-country runners at Martin Luther King High School in Riverside, California. Hosted by the runners' lawyers; the file-stamped header shows it is the filed document (Dkt. 117).

    Reliability: Speaks against its own interest. Written by the district's own lawyers, so its admissions cut against the district's interest. The copy is posted by Advocates for Faith & Freedom, who represent the runners.

    • The district admits the two runners were told to remove or conceal shirts reading "Save Girls' Sports" and "It's Common Sense. XX ≠ XY," citing a hostile environment.

      What the source says
      Defendant also admits K.S. and T.S. were…instructed to remove or conceal the shirts, citing the creation of a hostile
      Para. 11, p. 3

    • The district admits an administrator compared the shirts to wearing a swastika around Jewish students.

      What the source says
      Defendant admits that there was a…comparison between the shirts and the wearing of a swastika around Jewish
      Para. 12, p. 3

    • The district admits administrators said discipline could follow continued violations of the dress code.

      What the source says
      that discipline could result from continued violations of the District's dress code.
      Para. 273, p. 31

    • Qualifies: The district says it permits student messages within the recognized limits on school speech.

      What the source says
      the District permits messaging by students consistent with recognized restrictions on speech in
      Para. 282, p. 32
  9. Government U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights Finds San José State University Violated Title IX Free copy

    Press release, January 28, 2026, announcing the Office for Civil Rights finding against San José State University over its women's volleyball team.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. The current Education Department holds that Title IX requires sex-separated sports. SJSU and the CSU system dispute the findings and have sued the department.

    • OCR found SJSU subjected a women's volleyball player to a Title IX complaint for "misgendering" a teammate when she discussed the team in videos and interviews.

      What the source says
      SJSU did not investigate the conspiracy, but later subjected this female athlete to a Title IX complaint for reportedly “misgendering” the male athlete when discussing this incident in online videos and interviews.
      Background, final paragraph

    • OCR also found SJSU discouraged women from using the Title IX process.

      What the source says
      by taking action that discouraged women from participating in the Title IX process
      Background
  10. Government U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights Issues Letter of Impending Enforcement to San Jose State University on Title IX Compliance Free copy

    Press release, March 24, 2026, saying SJSU refused the proposed resolution agreement.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. The department is a party to the dispute with SJSU; the release states its own position.

    • Qualifies: SJSU refused to sign the proposed agreement, so the finding remains contested.

      What the source says
      SJSU refused to sign it or attempt to negotiate its terms
      Paragraph 1
  11. Government Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Office of Civil Rights. Final determination: finding of reasonable cause, Commonwealth of Virginia v. Roanoke College, OCR Case Nos. 2023-ED0109, 2024-ED0138, 2024-ED0139 (Aug. 25, 2025)

    The Virginia attorney general's civil-rights office determination on complaints by Roanoke College women swimmers. The attorney general's own release has since been removed from oag.state.va.us; this signed copy is hosted by ICONS, a women's sports advocacy group.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Issued by Attorney General Jason Miyares's office, which took a public position on the issue. A reasonable-cause finding is not a court judgment; the college denies it.

    • The office found reasonable cause that the college retaliated against swimmers who spoke out by rejecting them from May Term travel courses.

      What the source says
      the College retaliated against female swimmers in violation of the Virginia Human Rights Act by rejecting them from May Term Travel Courses for speaking out against the College's discriminatory policy
      Summary, p. 4

    • Qualifies: The office did not find that the women were denied the chance to compete or that the college created a hostile environment.

      What the source says
      the Office does not find sufficient evidence that the women were denied the opportunity to compete in this case or that the College itself subjected the women to a hostile environment based on sex
      Summary, p. 4
  12. News report WDBJ7. Roanoke College responds to Miyares’ report of discrimination against female athletes

    Local TV news report, August 25, 2025, with Roanoke College's written response.

    Reliability: Roanoke, Virginia TV station; the takeaway is the college's own statement.

    • Contradicts: The college calls the retaliation accusation false and says faculty used their usual selection process.

      What the source says
      That accusation is patently false; our faculty acted in good faith and followed our usual process regarding student selection for May Term courses.
      College statement · Roanoke College
  13. Advocacy group U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Testimony of Riley Gaines, Advisor, Independent Women's Voice, June 21, 2023 Free copy

    Written testimony by former University of Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing "Protecting Pride: Defending the Civil Rights of LGBTQ+ Americans."

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Gaines testified as an adviser to Independent Women's Voice, an advocacy group, and is a plaintiff in Gaines v. NCAA. Statements to Congress are subject to 18 U.S.C. 1001, but this passage names no school, person or incident.

    • Gaines told the Senate that female athletes who protested were threatened and intimidated into silence, without naming specific cases.

      What the source says
      female athletes who protested the inclusion of Lia Thomas in the women's division were threatened, intimidated, and emotionally blackmailed into silence and submission.
      p. 2
  14. Party to the dispute U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (plaintiffs' filing). Complaint, Estabrook v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, No. 1:25-cv-10281 (D. Mass., filed Feb. 4, 2025)

    Class-action complaint by three former Penn women swimmers against Penn, the Ivy League and the NCAA.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Allegations by the plaintiffs, not findings. The plaintiffs were adults; the court has not ruled on these allegations.

    • The swimmers allege Penn administrators warned that speaking publicly would brand them as transphobic and hurt their job prospects.

      What the source says
      the reputation of those complaining about Thomas being on the team would be tainted with transphobia for the rest of their lives and they would probably never be able to get a job.
      Para. 298, p. 58
  15. Other CourtListener (RECAP docket). Docket, Estabrook v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, No. 1:25-cv-10281 (D. Mass.)

    Public docket of the Penn swimmers' case, mirrored from PACER by the Free Law Project.

    Reliability: CourtListener mirrors federal docket entries. Entry 103 (July 29, 2025) is the stay order; later entries may not all be mirrored.

    • Qualifies: The court stayed the Penn case in July 2025 pending the earlier-filed Gaines v. NCAA case, so its allegations remain untested.

      What the source says
      STAYS this action pending resolution of the previously filed case.
      Docket entry 103, July 29, 2025
  16. Advocacy group Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism (FAIR). Civil rights complaint to the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights against Tumwater School District, February 17, 2025

    Third-party complaint FAIR filed on behalf of a Tumwater (Wash.) High School junior varsity basketball player after a February 6, 2025 game against a team with a transgender player.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. FAIR is an advocacy group that opposes gender-identity-based eligibility. The district's notice it cites (Exhibit A) is an image we could not read; the complaint is one side's account.

    • The complaint says the district opened a bullying-and-harassment investigation of the 15-year-old player for "misgendering" the opposing player.

      What the source says
      Instead, TSD is now investigating…for allegedly "misgendering" the male player, purportedly in violation of TSD policies against bullying and harassment.
      p. 2
  17. News report MyNorthwest (KIRO Newsradio). ‘There was a man in my locker room’: Tumwater athlete vows to keep fighting for girls sports

    Radio talk-show write-up, September 7, 2026, of an interview with the Tumwater player, now 17, about the 2025 game and I-638.

    Reliability: Opinion-talk program write-up. The outcome it reports comes only from the student; no district record or statement confirms it. (The write-up dates the game to 2024; it was February 2025.)

    • Qualifies: The only public account of the outcome is the student's: she says the school warned her of "progressive consequences."

      What the source says
      said she was threatened with “progressive consequences” by her school after the 2024 incident
      Body, after the I-638 discussion
  18. Government Washington Public Disclosure Commission (via data.wa.gov). Expenditures by Candidates and Committees (dataset tijg-9zyp), Let's Go Washington payments, April 30 to September 29, 2026

    Query of the PDC expenditure dataset for 13 itemized payments by Let's Go Washington to the Tumwater player's mother. The query omits the address field.

    Reliability: Campaign-reported expenditures published by the state; amounts are as filed by the committee. The committee backs three measures (IL26-001, IL26-638, IL26-645), so the wages are not tied to I-638 alone.

    • Qualifies: Let's Go Washington, the I-638 sponsor, paid the player's mother $27,485.32 in 13 payments (wages plus mileage) from April 30 to September 29, 2026 (our sum).

      What the source says
      Wages, salaries, benefits, payroll taxes
      13 records; field code; amounts summed by FactHub
  19. Government U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District Board of Education, No. 23-3630 (6th Cir. Nov. 6, 2025) (en banc)

    En banc opinion (10-7) on an Ohio district policy that barred students from using pronouns that match a classmate's sex when the classmate prefers others.

    Reliability: Binding in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee, not in Washington. It is a preliminary-injunction ruling; seven judges dissented.

    • The full Sixth Circuit ordered an injunction barring the Ohio district from punishing students for using pronouns that match a classmate's sex.

      What the source says
      We thus reverse and remand…for the entry of an appropriately tailored preliminary injunction barring the district from punishing students for the commonplace use of biological pronouns.
      Opinion, pp. 3-4

    • Qualifies: The court said schools may still enforce anti-harassment rules to protect transgender students.

      What the source says
      Yet nothing we say here forecloses the district from enforcing its anti-harassment policies against the abuse of transgender students just as it enforces those policies against the abuse of all other students.
      Opinion, p. 4

    • Qualifies: The opinion notes the First Circuit ruled the other way in a Massachusetts T-shirt case and the Supreme Court declined review.

      What the source says
      cert. denied, 145 S. Ct. 1489 (2025)
      Opinion, Bush concurrence, comparison with sister circuits
  20. Government U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. L.M. v. Town of Middleborough, No. 23-1535 (1st Cir. June 2024), 103 F.4th 854

    Appeals opinion upholding a Massachusetts middle school's ban on a student's "There Are Only Two Genders" shirt.

    Reliability: Binding in the First Circuit (New England and Puerto Rico), not in Washington. The Supreme Court denied review on May 27, 2025, over dissents by Justices Alito and Thomas.

    • Qualifies: The First Circuit upheld a school's order barring a 12-year-old's "There Are Only Two Genders" shirt.

      What the source says
      which the defendants applied to prohibit a twelve-year-old student first from wearing a t-shirt that read "There Are Only Two Genders"
      Opinion, p. 3
  21. News report CBS News. Utah investigates winning student-athlete's gender after parents of second- and third-place finishers submit complaints

    National news report, August 18, 2022, confirming with the Utah High School Activities Association an investigation it first disclosed to a legislative committee.

    Reliability: The facts come from the association's spokesperson, confirmed to CBS; the student was not identified.

    • Qualifies: Rival parents' complaint led Utah's athletic association to investigate whether a girl who won was female at birth.

      What the source says
      the parents of girls who won second and third place submitted a complaint through the UHSAA questioning whether the winner was assigned female at birth
      Paragraph 2

    • Qualifies: The girl and her parents were not told of the complaint or the investigation, which checked her records back to kindergarten.

      What the source says
      the student and her parents were unaware the complaint and investigation were going on
      Paragraph 4
  22. Government Washington Secretary of State. Initiative Measure No. IL26-638, final text (defending equity in interscholastic sports act)

    The text of I-638 as filed and certified for the November 3, 2026 ballot.

    Reliability: Official text published by the Secretary of State.

    • Qualifies: I-638's operative rule governs who may compete in girls' events; it does not address student speech, discipline or locker rooms.

      What the source says
      must prohibit biologically male students from competing with and against female students in athletic activities with separate classifications for male and female students
      Sec. 3(1)

    • Qualifies: Its one change to the state sex-equity statute is an athletics exception; that statute's harassment-policy section is unchanged.

      What the source says
      they shall be offered to all students without regard to sex, except as provided in section 3 of this act
      Sec. 4, RCW 28A.640.020(1)(c)

Update history

  1. First version.
  2. Updated related links to the final versions of sibling articles.
  3. Updated the link to the latest version of the campaign-funding fact check. No other changes.

Cited by

Version details

The exact citing versions, and the version of this article each cites.

  • Briefing wa-i-638 — version 5 (published) cites version 3
  • Briefing wa-i-638 — version 4 (published) cites version 3

For search, research, and AI systems

Machine-readable fact-check

This page includes standardized ClaimReview metadata describing the exact claim, FactHub's finding, publisher, and review dates. You can inspect the record below and confirm that it matches the article you just read.

View ClaimReview JSON 
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ClaimReview","url":"https://facthub.org/n/article/students-disciplined-for-objecting/3","datePublished":"2026-10-23","dateModified":"2026-10-23","author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"FactHub","url":"https://facthub.org/"},"claimReviewed":"Students who objected to transgender athletes in girls\u0027 sports or locker rooms have faced school discipline or investigation in several documented cases, some ending in settlements or federal findings.","reviewRating":{"@type":"Rating","alternateName":"True"},"image":"https://facthub.org/node-assets-v2/article/students-disciplined-for-objecting/3/empty-locker-room/social-1200x630.jpg"}

This metadata helps machines discover the fact-check. It does not prove the conclusion or guarantee special treatment by a search engine.

Challenge this fact-check

Every source above is linked so you can check it yourself. Identify the specific conclusion you dispute and provide verifiable evidence that could change it. Credible challenges deserve review and a visible response.

Submit evidence Send general feedback instead

Technical details: node handle article:students-disciplined-for-objecting