34 C.F.R. § 106.6

Effect of other requirements and preservation of rights

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Effect of other Federal provisions. The obligations imposed by this part are independent of, and do not alter, obligations not to discriminate on the basis of sex imposed by Executive Order 11246, as amended; sections 704 and 855 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 292d and 298b-2); Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.); the Equal Pay Act (29 U.S.C. 206 and 206(d)); and any other Act of Congress or Federal regulation.

(Authority: Secs. 901, 902, 905, Education Amendments of 1972, 86 Stat. 373, 374, 375; 20 U.S.C. 1681, 1682, 1685)

(b) Effect of State or local law or other requirements. The obligation to comply with Title IX and this part is not obviated or alleviated by any State or local law or other requirement that conflicts with Title IX or this part.

(c) Effect of rules or regulations of private organizations. The obligation to comply with this part is not obviated or alleviated by any rule or regulation of any organization, club, athletic or other league, or association which would render any applicant or student ineligible to participate or limit the eligibility or participation of any applicant or student, on the basis of sex, in any education program or activity operated by a recipient and which receives Federal financial assistance.

(d) Constitutional protections. Nothing in this part requires a recipient to:

(1) Restrict any rights that would otherwise be protected from government action by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution;

(2) Deprive a person of any rights that would otherwise be protected from government action under the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution; or

(3) Restrict any other rights guaranteed against government action by the U.S. Constitution.

(e) Effect of Section 444 of General Education Provisions Act (GEPA)/Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The obligation to comply with Title IX and this part is not obviated or alleviated by FERPA, 20 U.S.C. 1232g, or its implementing regulations, 34 CFR part 99.

(f) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Nothing in this part may be read in derogation of any individual's rights under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. or any regulations promulgated thereunder.

(g) Exercise of rights by parents, guardians, or other authorized legal representatives. Nothing in Title IX or this part may be read in derogation of any legal right of a parent, guardian, or other authorized legal representative to act on behalf of a complainant, respondent, or other person, subject to paragraph (e) of this section, including but not limited to making a complaint through the recipient's grievance procedures for complaints of sex discrimination.

[45 FR 30955, May 9, 1980, as amended at 65 FR 68056, Nov. 13, 2000; 85 FR 30573, 30579, May 19, 2020; 89 FR 33885, Apr. 29, 2024]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: Veronica Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High Sch., 768 F.3d 843 (9th Cir. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Veronica Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High Sch., 768 F.3d 843 (9th Cir. 2014). “” 34 C.F.R. § 106.6 (c); see also Biediger, 691 F.”

Litman v. George Mason Univ., 156 F. Supp. 2d 579 (E.D. Va. 2001). “See 34 C.F.R. § 106.6 (a). In any event, even if the historical context supported the use of Title VII standards to make out a Title IX *587 retaliation case, the Court is bound by the text of the statute, not Congress’s unstated intentions.”

Horner v. Kentucky High Sch. Athletic Ass'n, 43 F.3d 265 (6th Cir. 1994). “The obligation to comply with this part is not obviated or alleviated by any rule or regulation of any organization, club, athletic or other league, or association which would render any applicant or student ineligible to participate or limit the eligibility or participation of…”

Dep't of Educ. v. Louisiana, 603 U.S. 866 (2024). “33885 (to be codifed in 34 CFR § 106.6 (g)); three provisions address- ing schools' obligations in responding to claims implicating Title IX, in- cluding measures to assist impacted parties, employee-notifcation require- ments, Title IX coordinator duties, applicable grievance…”

A-46-24 in the Matter of Rutgers, the State Univ. of New Jersey, & AFSCME Local 888 (N.J. 2026). · cites it 4× “] The Regulations also contain a preemption clause, 34 C.F.R. § 106.6 (h). Entitled “Preemptive effect,” that provision mandates that, “[t]o the extent of a conflict between State or local law and [T]itle IX .”

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Devos (D.D.C. 2020). · cites it 2× “See 34 C.F.R. §§ 106.6 (g), 106.45(b)(5)(i) (citing id.”

State of Louisiana v. U S Dept of Educ. (W.D. La. 2024). · cites it 2× “2 2) Revising 34 C.F.R. 106.6 to declare that the Final Rule preempts state law.”

State of New York v. United States Dep't of Educ. (S.D.N.Y. 2020). “” 34 C.F.R. § 106.6 (h). In publishing the Rule, the DOE stated that it followed Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, which among other things, require that the DOE adopt a regulation only on a reasoned determination that the regulation’s benefits justify its costs.”

Doe 1 v. Starpoint Cent. Sch. Dist. (W.D.N.Y. 2023). “” 34 C.F.R. § 106.6 (h) (emphasis added). In other words, that provision simply reiterates the uncontroversial proposition that federal law preempts conflicting state law.”

Dep't of Educ. v. Louisiana, 603 U.S. 866 (2024). “33885 (to be codified in 34 CFR §106.6 (g)); three provisions addressing schools’ obligations in responding to claims implicating Title IX, including measures to assist impacted parties, employee-notification requirements, Title IX coordinator duties, applicable grievance proce-…”

— 34 C.F.R. § 106.6(b) — 1 case

State of Louisiana v. U S Dept of Educ. (W.D. La. 2024). “2 2) Revising 34 C.F.R. 106.6 to declare that the Final Rule preempts state law.”

— 34 C.F.R. § 106.6(h) — 1 case

A-46-24 in the Matter of Rutgers, the State Univ. of New Jersey, & AFSCME Local 888 (N.J. 2026). “] The Regulations also contain a preemption clause, 34 C.F.R. § 106.6 (h). Entitled “Preemptive effect,” that provision mandates that, “[t]o the extent of a conflict between State or local law and [T]itle IX .”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.