by LOUDOUN COUNTY, VA – Two teenage boys at Stone Bridge High School in Loudoun County have been suspended for 10 days after an incident in which they questioned a transgender student’s presence inside the boys’ locker room, according to attorneys representing their families.
The suspension, which followed a Title IX investigation, has sparked a firestorm in Virginia, igniting debate over student rights, gender identity policies, and whether schools are punishing free expression.
What Sparked the Controversy?
The incident occurred earlier this year inside a boys’ locker room at Stone Bridge High. According to attorney Josh Heltzer, who represents the boys’ families, the students were recorded on video asking why a biologically female student who identifies as male was in the boys’ locker room.
The video was filmed by the transgender student involved in the incident. While it is generally illegal to record inside a locker room, Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) officials confirmed that no privacy laws were violated because no students appeared in compromising positions.
Title IX Investigation and Suspension
Following the review, LCPS determined the students were responsible for sexual harassment and sex-based discrimination. The disciplinary measures included:
- 10-day suspension from school
- A no-contact order with the transgender student
- Restrictions preventing them from being in the same classes
- Mandatory meetings with administrators to develop a “corrective action plan”
Families argue this response is excessive.
Seth Wolfe, father of one suspended student, expressed frustration:
“We’re saddened by the decision-making process and how that went.”
According to Fox News, Renae Smith, mother of the other boy, said she was so outraged that she withdrew her son from Stone Bridge High and moved the family out of state.
“They branded my son responsible for sexual harassment with no solid evidence. It’s wrong, and it should terrify every single parent.”
Attorney General Challenges School’s Decision
The case has drawn the attention of Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, who has referred LCPS to federal authorities for review.
Miyares accused the district of targeting the boys not for misconduct, but for expressing discomfort about sharing facilities with a transgender student. He noted that the video showed no discriminatory language, only questions from the boys asking the student to leave.
Read Also: Las Vegas Pastor Among 8 Arrested in Child Predator Sting, Police Say
This development has elevated the case from a local school dispute to a potential statewide legal battle over students’ rights and school policy enforcement.
Policy 8040: A Point of Tension in Loudoun County
At the center of the controversy is Policy 8040, adopted by LCPS in 2021, which allows students to use restrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity rather than their biological sex.
Supporters of the policy say it ensures transgender students are protected and included. Opponents argue it creates conflicts in private spaces and punishes students who express discomfort.
Loudoun County has a history of high-profile disputes over gender identity policies:
- In 2021, the district faced national backlash after a sexual assault case involving a transgender student in a school restroom.
- LCPS spent $11 million installing gender-neutral, single-use restrooms in nine schools to address concerns.
- The district has repeatedly been at the center of state and national political debates over LGBTQ+ student rights.
Families Plan to Keep Fighting
The Founding Freedoms Law Center, which represents the families, has vowed to challenge the suspensions until they are overturned.
Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation of Virginia, said:
“Our clients have done nothing wrong. They deserve to be deemed innocent. LCPS is making examples out of these boys.”
Cobb and other critics argue the school district is using discipline to silence dissenting views on transgender policies. Meanwhile, LCPS maintains it follows a “comprehensive and objective process” for Title IX investigations.
Broader Implications for Students and Schools
The case raises questions that extend beyond Loudoun County:
- Free Speech vs. Harassment – Are students being disciplined for discriminatory harassment, or for simply expressing discomfort?
- Parental Concerns – Families fear a permanent suspension record could harm college applications.
- Policy Conflicts – Should gender identity policies override objections from other students in shared spaces?
- Legal Standards – Title IX protects students from sex-based discrimination, but courts continue to debate how these protections apply to gender identity.
For many parents, the Loudoun County case reflects a broader struggle between protecting transgender rights and ensuring fairness for all students.
Do you think the Loudoun County students were treated fairly, or did the school go too far with its punishment? Share your views in the comments at ibwhsmag.com.
