Louisiana lawmakers have said it once, twice, and now a third time: Sex is a physical reality, not a feeling.

President Joe Biden’s administration wants to redefine sex to mean “gender” in federal law, which would force schools to allow boys to use girls’ restrooms and participate in female athletics.

Louisiana officials have issued letters and filed a lawsuit opposing the change, and they are about to stamp the basic truth into statute.

Pelican State officials have approved a proposal that says sex is “immutable,” that a “female” is someone who produces eggs absent a biological anomaly, and that a “male” is someone who produces sperm.

The proposal also says that K-12 educators must call a minor-age student by the name or pronoun listed on the child’s birth certificate.

Those provisions are similar to The Heritage Foundation’s model bills—and are bulwarks against dangerous gender ideology threatening women and girls. (Heritage founded The Daily Signal in 2014.)

Gov. Jeff Landry’s signature would make Louisiana the eighth state to adopt a version of a “Given Name Act,” which requires parental permission before a teacher can socially affirm a child’s confusion about his or her sex by using a name or pronoun that does not correspond to the student’s official records.

Lawmakers should insert parents back into important health-related conversations educators may have with the parents’ students. Children confused about their sex need compassion and wise counsel—and for their primary caregivers to be a part of those conversations.

Louisiana’s proposal rebuts the Biden administration’s rule change to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which is a crucial part of federal civil rights law. In addition to changing “sex” to “gender,” the new rule rejects U.S. Supreme Court precedent in harassment cases.

The White House is circumventing Congress on all these matters and violating basic administrative procedures, along with endangering women by allowing men who “feel” feminine to undress in private spaces meant for women and girls.

Far-fetched? Hardly. Last year, an 18-year-old male exposed himself to minor-age females in a locker room in Wisconsin. In California, a man undressed in front of a teenage girl in a YMCA bathroom. Assaults in changing rooms, injuries on athletic fields, drag queens dancing in front of children in public schools—these events all put the lie to any claim that gender ideology doesn’t threaten children.

The proposal soon headed to Landry’s desk is not the first effort from Louisiana policymakers to reject Washington’s gender-based policies.

In April, state Superintendent of Education Cade Brumley sent a letter to school district personnel saying they should not conform to the change in Title IX. One week later, Louisiana Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill and the state Department of Education joined the attorneys general from Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho in a lawsuit against the change to Title IX. 

In total, 26 states are represented across eight lawsuits rejecting the change. “There is normal federal government overreach—and then there is the Final Rule [changing Title IX]: a naked attempt to strong-arm our schools … . The Final Rule is an affront to the dignity of families and school administrators everywhere, and it is nowhere close to legal,” wrote Murrill and the co-plaintiffs in the case led by Louisiana.

The administration’s change to Title IX also puts the president at odds with public opinion. Surveys find that Americans oppose policies that allow boys participating in girls’ sports or teaching on “gender” to young children.

Biden’s team is also cutting against research, as a growing body of literature reveals that doctors do not know enough about the effects of puberty blockers and other gender-related interventions to determine the long-term outcomes on patients. (The United Kingdom’s Department of Health and Social Care just banned the use of puberty blockers on individuals younger than 18.)

Biden’s team is on slippery ground legally, in terms of public opinion, and medically. State officials have solid reasons to say “no,” while the White House has nothing to stand on.