Summary
The U.S. Department of Education’s final rule under Title IX expands the scope of the law’s prohibition on sex discrimination so it also applies to discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The Biden administration’s Title IX rewrite has drawn at least nine lawsuits. At least 26 states have signed onto the lawsuits. The rule is on hold in 26 states. GEI’s lawsuit in Michigan is a private (non-attorney general) lawsuit brought against the U.S. Department of Education in a state where no other lawsuits challenging Title IX final rule have been brought.
Overview
Reason to Invest:
Parents and students are faced with both security and moral problems when transgender students are using private spaces that are not aligned with their biology. Schools have adopted a trans first policy or written or unwritten. For instance schools are allowing biological boys into girls private spaces like bathrooms and locker rooms.
The lawsuit challenges a federal agency rule requiring public schools to discipline parents and students for sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. The federal agency rule escalates the social tension over security and moral problems involving trans students using private spaces that are not aligned with their biology–including bathrooms, locker rooms and sports.
Team
.jpg)
Gregory M. Erickson
Contact Me: (612) 979-9791
Education University of Minnesota Law School, Minneapolis, Minnesota J.D. - 1997 Honors: cum laude Miami University, Oxford, Ohio B.A. - 1993 Honors: Cum Laude Major: Political History Science Bar Admissions Minnesota Wisconsin United States Supreme Court U.S. Court of Appeals 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Western District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois Representative Cases Advanced Communication Design v. Follett, 615 N.W. 2d 285, 2000 Pergament v. Loring Properties, Ltd., 599 N.W.2d 146, 1999 Digital Resources LLC v. James Loestetter, et. al., 246 B.R. 357, 2000 Past Positions Rider Bennett, LLP, Partner Professional Associations Minnesota Bar Association, Member Hennepin County Bar Association, Member American Bar Association, Member Certified Legal Specialties M.S.B.A. Board Certified Real Estate Specialist
.jpg)
Elizabeth Nielsen
Contact Me: (612) 979-9791
Education University of Illinois College of Law, Illinois J.D. - 2022 Honors: magna cum laude Honors: Rickert Award for Excellence in Advocacy Honors: Paul M. Lisnek Award for Excellence and Ethics in Trial Advocacy Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois B.A. - 2014 Honors: summa cum laude Honors: Chancellor’s Scholar Major: Political Science Major: Theater Minor: French Bar Admissions Minnesota Michigan Pennsylvania U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit U.S. District Court District of Minnesota U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan
Erick G. Kaardal
Contact Me: (612)-341-1074
Education University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, Illinois J.D. - 1992 Harvard College Honors: magna cum laude Honors: U.S. Army Reserve Officer Training Corps scholarship Major: Economics Bar Admissions Minnesota Wisconsin U.S. Supreme Court U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit U.S. District Court District of Minnesota U.S. District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Western District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court Central District of Illinois U.S. District Court Northern District of Iowa U.S. District Court District of Idaho U.S. District Court Northern District of Georgia U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan U.S. District Court Western District of Michigan U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania U.S. Court of Federal Claims U.S. Tax Court Representative Cases Republican Party of Minnesota v. White (U.S. Supreme Court victory 5-4), 2002 Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky (U.S. Supreme Court victory 7-2), 2018 Honors Outstanding Contribution to the Cause of Liberty, Institute for Justice Minnesota Lawyer, Lawyer of the Year, 2018 Life Legal Defense Foundation "Defender of Life" Award Winner – 2021 Pro-Bono Activities Republican Party of Minnesota, Past Secretary/Treasurer John Adams Society, Past Chairman Minnesota Chapter of the Federalist Society, Advisory Board Member Past Positions Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, PA - since January 1, 2000 Trimble & Associates, Ltd., Associate Attorney, 1994-1999 Faegre & Benson, Associate Attorney, 1992-1994 U.S. Army Reserves, Minnesota and Illinois National Guard, Field Artillery Officer, Captain (retired)
PITCH
​
Problem
-
Biden Administration has rewritten TItle IX to include trans-people as a protected class thus removing protections for women. This is directly impacting safety and privacy in bathrooms, locker rooms, and sporting activities.
​
​
Solution
-
We need a federal complaint that has a state-wide impact for Blue States that do not have friendly AGs.
​
-
Title IX Complaints by red-state AGs have already been filed in a number of District Courts.
​
-
This is the first non-AG driven case in a Blue State to bring a state-wide Title IX Complaint. This is important because it will provide relief within a Blue State that the above mentioned complaints may not impact. It will also set a new precedent that state-wide non-profit membership organizations can bring state-wide complaints on behalf of their membership without AG action.
​
​
Viability
-
There are 26 states that have filed Title IX lawsuits using friendly AGs.
-
The District Courts provided immediate injunctions.
-
The Circuit and US Supreme Court upheld the injunctions.
-
We believe the 6th Circuit will be amenable to our Michigan complaint due to its already upholding a previous injunction from a Kentucky Federal District Court.
-
This private lawsuit goes beyond the other AG lawsuits by pursuing damages based on a Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim.
​
​
Desired Outcome
-
Repeal of Title IX redefinition to reinstate protection and privacy and opportunity for women in public education in Blue States.
-
Damages for interference with GEI Membership Parental Opt-Out Program
-
Reimbursement of Attorneys Fees
Organization Information:
​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
Great Education Initiative
The Great Education Initiative is a non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for premium public education. We believe that all students should have access to a high quality education with the resources they need to succeed while aligning with their family's values. We are committed to amplifying the voices of our parents, students, and public school initiatives.
Our mission is to promote a culture of excellence in public education by advocating for the rights of parents, the safety and security of students, and an orthodox education. We are committed to fighting for the future of our youth and the advancement of our public school system.
​
​
​
​
It takes a great deal of work and sacrifice to build a successful enterprise. When the government seeks to derail that success, you have a right to protect the fruits of your labor. Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, P.A., defends family-owned businesses, small companies and nonprofits that have been sued by the government.
Our accomplished trial lawyers enable “the little guy” to stand up against the considerable power of the government, whether they are fighting City Hall, the state attorney general or a federal agency. Our team provides actionable advice and legal firepower to push back against government overreach and abuse of power to safeguard business interests and personal liberties.
Milestones
Phase - 1 Funding is Aiding Ongoing Action
$50,000 The Initial Title IX Complaint (Immediate)
-
Filing in the US District Court Eastern District of Michigan
-
Project has started and is Active at $25,000 of Phase -1 Funding
​
Phase -2
$60,000 US District Court Motion Practice (1 Year)
-
Motion to Dismiss, Discovery, and Summary Judgment
​
Phase -3
$120,000 Trial (if required) (6 Months)
-
A small number of such cases require trial. If required, we will provide trial preparation, witness lists, exhibit lists, pre-trial motions, trial and post-trial motions.
​
Phase -4
$60,000 Appeal (if required) (1 Year)
-
A small number of such cases require Appeal. If required, we will provide notice of appeal, principal brief, reply brief, and oral argument.
​
Project Milestone Fees include a 20% Administrative Expense which covers items including website, legal, accounting, management, and advertising.