The Disruptive Power of Policy Erasure: How State Legislators and School Boards Fail to Take up Trans-affirming Policies While Leaning into AntiLGBTQ + Policies

Oct 15, 2026

Since 2017, hostile anti-LGBTQ+ educational bills expanded quickly. Drawing on traditional and critical policy analysis across three Midwestern states, the study evaluates whether policymakers (n = 60) adopted transinclusive protections aligned with the 2017 Whitaker ruling, maps the spread and scope of LGBTQ+ educational policies, and examines links to LGBTQ+ and critical race theory (CRT) curricular bills. Results show policy erasure in states lacking pre-Whitaker gender-inclusive protections and increased exclusion of LGBTQ+ students from educational opportunities, spaces, and curricula.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages58

Reading Time2 h 26 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Keywords

Background and Policy Context

Policy Erasure and Judicial/Legal Framework

The Disruptive Power of Policy Erasure: How State Legislators and School Boards Fail to Take up Trans-affirming Policies While Leaning into AntiLGBTQ + Policies Educational Policy 2024, Vol. 38(3) 642–699 􀀂 The Author(s) 2024 Article reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[DOI: 10.1177/08959048231218206](DOI: 10.1177/08959048231218206)[ ](DOI: 10.1177/08959048231218206)[journals.sagepub.com/home/epx](journals.sagepub.com/home/epx) Mollie T. McQuillan 1, Benjamin A. Lebovitz 1, and LaShanda Harbin 1 Abstract Since 2017, hostile anti-LGBTQ + educational bills rapidly expanded. Using traditional and critical policy analysis across three Midwestern states, we examine (1) whether state and local policymakers (n = 60) adopted transinclusive protections aligned with the 2017 federal Whitaker ruling, (2) the spread and scope of state and local educational policies concerning LGBTQ+ people, and (3) relationships between LGBTQ and critical race theory (CRT) curricular bills. We find policy erasure in states without preWhitaker gender-inclusive nondiscrimination laws and expanded efforts to ban LGBTQ + students from educational opportunities, spaces, and curriculum. LGBTQ + and CRT curricular bans overlapped. We discuss the implications of policymakers leaning into exclusion over gender reforms. Keywords nondiscrimination, transgender, LGBTQ + , erasure, critical policy analysis, exclusionary policies 1 University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA Corresponding Author: Mollie T. McQuillan, Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis, University of Wisconsin – Madison, 270C Education Building, 1000 Bascom Mall, Madison, WI 53706, USA. [Email: mmcquillan@wisc.edu](Email: mmcquillan@wisc.edu) As a young LGBTQ+ child, I was constantly a target for bullies and closeminded people who would rather isolate me than accept me for who I am. I honestly don’t believe I wouldn’t be standing here today if it had not been for my teachers who saw me, accepted me, and the proud, out educators who let me know that I was not alone in this world. This bill would take that away from our children. Damon Clevenger, Indiana Public School Teacher (C. Smith, 2023, p. 4) In the last 5 years, anti-LGBTQ+ state bills have expanded in their number and reach to erase lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other gender-expansive (LGBTQ+) people—and especially transgender (trans) students—from participation in critical aspects of school life. In the quote above, Damon Clevenger refers to one of several 2023 educational bills in Indiana, which included bathroom bans, school-based atheletics bans, and curricular bans. While most state laws offer additional nondiscrimination policy protections for LGBTQ+ students (Temkin et al., 2022), Crenshaw’s (1988) suggestion that policymakers have written nondiscrimination laws to make them ‘‘fundamentally ambiguous and [interpretations of nondiscrimination laws] can accommodate conservative as well as liberal views of race and equality’’ (p. 1335) remains relevant to current conversations concerning LGBTQ+ people. Since 2022, the educational policy conversations concerning LGBTQ+ students have expanded in topic areas, centering whether trans and gender-expansive students have a right to the same educational spaces, opportunities, and curricular representation as their cisgender peers. We propose that these bills, laws, and policies advocating to ban trans people from educational opportunities, curriculum, and spaces go beyond mere policy distractions from reforming oppressive cisheterosexist education systems. Rather, these measures signal state-sanctioned erasure of trans people in the U.S. educational system. The political situation has heightened to the point where one of the United States’ closest allies, Canada (Associated Press, 2023b), the largest U.S. civil rights organization (NAACP, 2023), and the la

FAQs

What does the article examine about transinclusive educational policy adoption?

It investigates whether state and local policymakers adopted transinclusive protections aligned with the 2017 federal Whitaker ruling, across three Midwestern states.

What are the study’s main findings about policy erasure?

The study finds policy erasure in states without pre-Whitaker gender-inclusive nondiscrimination laws and expanded efforts to ban LGBTQ+ students from educational opportunities, spaces, and curriculum.

How does the article connect LGBTQ+ bans with critical race theory (CRT) curricular bills?

It reports overlap between LGBTQ+ and CRT curricular bans and discusses implications for policymakers choosing exclusion over gender reform.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by MrHarris58