Dear Majority Leader Thune, Minority Leader Schumer, and Members of the U.S. Senate:

The National Women’s Law Center, which has advocated on behalf of women and girls since it was founded in 1972 – the same year Congress passed Title IX – writes in strong opposition to the confirmation of Kimberly Richey for Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education. The Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing civil rights laws to ensure that students across the country have access to equal educational opportunities in safe and inclusive school environments. However, Ms. Richey’s ideological views on transgender students’ access to education and disregard for rule of law make it clear she is unqualified for this role. We urge you to oppose her confirmation.

Ms. Richey’s first tenure at the Office for Civil Rights demonstrates that she is not committed to ensuring that all students have equal access to education. During her time as Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights under the first Trump Administration, Richey sent an enforcement action letter1 to the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC) and Connecticut school districts stating that their transgender inclusive sport policy violated Title IX despite the Supreme Court’s then recent decision in Bostock v. Clayton County holding that discrimination on the basis of transgender status is a form of sex discrimination.2 In this letter, Richey stated that the enforcement action was a formal statement of OCR interpretation of Title IX notwithstanding OCR’s typical practice that such enforcement actions are not formal statements of policy in and of themselves.3 As a result of this purported violation of Title IX, OCR threatened to rescind funding provided to Connecticut school districts through the Magnet Schools Assistance Program, which provides millions of dollars to support educational equity, including desegregation efforts.4 Under her earlier leadership over OCR, Richey also responded to a letter5 from Concerned Women of America about Bostock’s application to Title IX. In that letter, she said that Bostock doesn’t control OCR’s interpretation of Title IX, and that even assuming Bostock’s reasoning applied to Title IX, it wouldn’t impact OCR’s position that Title IX requires transgender students to be barred from playing on sports teams consistent with their gender identity. This reasoning, and the CIAC enforcement letter, conflicted with then existing precedent from at least 5 federal circuit courts that held that transgender students were protected under Title IX, including when accessing sex-separated facilities or playing sports.6 After her tenure at OCR, Ms. Richey co-authored an op-ed7 for Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (OCPA) where she encouraged parents to fight against a gender-inclusive bathroom policy at an Oklahoma school. Her past actions demonstrate both a willingness to disregard Supreme Court precedent when it conflicts with her ideological views and an active desire to punish states and school districts for undertaking policies to forward equity in education, including policies for inclusion of transgender students.

More recently, in Richey’s opening statement8 and at her confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, she repeatedly suggested that the rights of transgender students and the rights of cisgender women and girls are somehow in conflict with each other.9 Her sentiments indicate an intent to distort Title IX’s protections to justify discrimination against transgender students and ignore the protections that it extends to these students. Cisgender women do not thrive when sex stereotypes are allowed to flourish and the policing of any woman’s body harms all women.

Furthermore, Ms. Richey’s previous and recent actions in response to orders and requests from the President raise serious concerns about her priorities. During her time as Acting Assistant Secretary of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), which she held before leading OCR under the first Trump administration, Richey led the office in rescinding 72 guidance documents related to special education policy labeling these documents “outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective.”10 This rescission was in response to the executive order by President Trump (during his first term) seeking to “alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.” Despite her claims that the docs were outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective, these rescinded documents included vital information surrounding due process for parents and children, least restrictive environment (which ensures students with disabilities are taught alongside their peers), and guidance on parental consent to use public benefits. Most recently, during her Senate hearing, she failed to take a stance on the reversal of federal funding cuts and threats of cuts to school districts and institutions with racial and gender inclusive practices. If the head of the Office for Civil Rights won’t stand up for the civil rights of all students and the resources necessary to engage in meaningful enforcement of our civil rights laws, who will? The Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights has the obligation to allocate federal funding in accordance with Congressional budget appropriations and civil rights laws and policies, not merely to enforce the whims of the President. Ms. Richey’s responses in her confirmation hearing call into question whether her commitment is to the students and children of this country.

Our nation’s students deserve an Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights who is dedicated to robustly enforcing federal civil rights laws, preserving public education, and strengthening, not gutting, the U.S. Department of Education’s ability to support students—regardless of their sex, LGBTQI+ status, immigration status, family income, race, ethnicity, religion, or disability.

Students deserve someone who will advocate for them, not someone who will be selective in the enforcement and protection of their civil rights. Given Ms. Richey’s harmful ideological views and her failure to prioritize enforcement of federal law, we have no confidence that she can meet the standards of this office. The National Women’s Law Center strongly opposes the confirmation of Kimberly Richey and urges the members U.S. Senate to reject this nomination. If you have questions about the Law Center’s opposition to Ms. Richey’s nomination, please contact me, or Bayliss Fiddiman, Senior Director of Educational Equity, at [email protected].

Read the full letter here.