NAWL Joined Challenge to "Skirts-Required" Dress Code Policy - Peltier et al v. Charter Day School, Inc. et al.

Isabell Retamoza • September 20, 2023

June 14, 2022 UPDATE: the en banc Fourth Circuit upheld the district court’s decision that North Carolina charter schools are state actors, and that the discriminatory dress code violates the Equal Protection Clause because it was based on impermissible sex stereotypes. The court also held that Title IX applies to dress codes, reversing the district court’s dismissal of the students’ Title IX claim and remanding for further proceedings. Read more and find the brief here.


August 9, 2021 UPDATE:  the 4th Circuit published its opinion in Peltier v. Charter Day School. The court sided with Peltier on the Title IX issue and concluded that dress codes are not categorically excluded from the scope of Title IX. In so doing, the court cited to our amicus brief on page 33 of the opinion. As for the bad news, the court also reversed Peltier's win on the equal protection issue, concluding that Charter Day School was not a state actor and thus cannot be subjected to an equal protection claim.


On July 13th, 2020, NAWL joined the National Women’s Law Center, along with their law firm partner Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, and 55 additional organizations, in support of three students represented by the ACLU Women’s Rights Project by filing an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The students are challenging whether the school dress code policy, which requires all girls to wear skirts, “skorts,” or “jumpers” to school, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, the North Carolina state constitution, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, and North Carolina state law.

April 30, 2026
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Louisiana v. Callais , ruling 6–3 that Louisiana’s congressional map creating a second majority-Black district is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. In reaching that decision, the Court narrowed how Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act may be used to remedy racial vote dilution, despite prior findings that Louisiana’s earlier maps likely infringed on the voting rights of Black residents. This decision marks a serious setback for voting rights and democratic participation. For nearly six decades, the Voting Rights Act has served as a cornerstone of our legal system’s effort to confront and remedy structural discrimination in the electoral process. By restricting the tools available to address unequal representation, the Court’s ruling makes it harder to correct long standing disparities in who has a voice in our elections. In a dissent read aloud from the bench, Justice Elena Kagan cautioned that the Court’s decision undermines one of the last effective tools for protecting fair representation. Describing the ruling’s impact on the Voting Rights Act, she wrote that Section 2 is now “all but a dead letter,” unable to fulfill its core purpose. She highlighted that a democracy cannot function as promised when the law prevents meaningful remedies for electoral systems that lock some communities out of political power. NAWL is committed to a democracy that works for everyone, supported by a legal system that recognizes discrimination and acts to correct it. As lawyers, judges, advocates, and scholars, we understand that voting rights are foundational to all other rights. NAWL will continue to engage its members on the implications of this decision through education and dialogue. We invite NAWL members to continue this important conversation by attending our session “ Louisiana v. Callais : Voting Rights and the Future of Our Democracy” at NAWL’s 2026 Annual Meeting in Chicago on July 22–23 . Hear from Jessica Ellsworth (Partner and Co-Chair, Supreme Court and Appellate Practice at Hogan Lovells), Samuel Spital (Associate Director-Counsel at the Legal Defense Fund), Franita Tolson (Dean of USC Gould School of Law), and Wendy Weiser (Vice President, Democracy at Brennan Center for Justice). Our expert panel will examine the implications of this decision and its future impact on voting rights and the rule of law.
March 30, 2026
Perkins Coie LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice
January 1, 2026
Doe v. Catholic Relief Services
December 17, 2025
Female Athletes United v. Ellison
Columns of a classical building with ornate carvings against a clear blue sky.
October 7, 2025
Perkins v. State of Montana
Stone steps leading up to a building with columns, in natural light.
September 10, 2025
Metropolitan School District of Martinsville v. A.C.
More Posts