Politically-Motivated Lawsuits Impact Northern Virginia Schools

Updates on Politically-Motivated Lawsuits

Assaults on our public schools are not just being fought just at school board meetings and by Executive Orders, but they are also being conducted through politically motivated lawsuits and investigations, many of which lack merit. These lawsuits and associated investigations are a costly way to attack public schools. Just one politically motivated investigation by Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares generated over $1.65 million in outside legal costs for Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS), but that doesn’t fully calculate the cost to Virginia taxpayers. 

Over the last five years, there have been hundreds of lawsuits by dark money groups against public school districts across the nation. Some, like America First Legal (AF Legal), of Project 2025, have focused significant energy targeting local northern Virginia school districts, in particular FCPS and Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS), often with Virginia’s AG acting as a cooperating partner. While AF Legal goes to social media to crow about their “big wins,” many of which are not really anything to crow about, it would be interesting to determine the total amount their politically motivated lawsuits have cost taxpayers in those counties.

Since the Trump Administration took office in January 2025, they have focused significant energy targeting these same school districts, often in combination with AF Legal. In fact, they have used U.S. Department of Education (ED) Office of Civil Rights (OCR) in many of these cases, despite firing OCR attorneys and a backlog of thousands of civil rights cases which are not being addressed. All of this is happening while the US ED OCR is being dismantled and their work is transferred to other divisions. 

Updates on some of the most critical lawsuits against FCPS and LCPS are outlined below. However, as one reads these updates, one would wonder: How do the cases below come to the front of the line of 25,000 OCR complaints? There are 25,000 complaints, many of which involve active and ongoing harm against students attempting to: access special education, protection from sexual harassment and abuse, and protection from retaliation. OCR has been so lax regarding these cases that their website hasn’t been updated since January 14, 2025.

In the case of Loudoun and Fairfax counties, AF Legal and US ED OCR have magically managed to expedite some of the cases below in front of dozens of open civil rights cases related to restraint and seclusion, sexual violence, and disabilities. Why? Why do AF Legal clients receive red carpet treatment from Trump’s US ED? 

Title IX Lawsuit against US ED by FCPS

On behalf of FCPS, Superintendent Michelle Reid gave an update on their lawsuit against the US ED concerning the school system’s policies and regulations on bathroom and locker room use based on a student’s gender identity. Oral arguments are expected in late January 2026.

Previously, the ED had issued a demand that would force FCPS to discriminate against their students or put the school system at risk of losing $167 million or more in federal funding that primarily affects lower income schools and students with learning disabilities. Initially, the Court for the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed one FCPS legal challenge but the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to hear the case on appeal. Oral arguments are scheduled for late January 2026 and briefs are linked below. FCPS is just one of many public school divisions across the country that have lost federal funding due to policy disagreements with the ED. 

It is important to note that this recent lawsuit (Fairfax County School Board v. McMahon, 1:25-cv-01432) by FCPS was precipitated by an AF Legal complaint submitted on February 3, 2025 that triggered a US ED OCR investigation only nine days later. On July 25, 2025, US ED OCR found FCPS and four other northern Virginia districts to be in violation of Title IX and made demands incompatible with FCPS’s commitment to “fostering a safe, supportive, welcoming, and inclusive school environment for all students and staff.”

Read more at these links: Message from FCPS Superintendent December 6, 2025; FCPS legal Brief in support of Appeal, October 20, 2025;, ED Response Brief November 19, 2025 ; and FCPS Response Brief, December 5, 2025 . If you want background about the case, please see the fourth item in 4 Public Education’s recent blog.

$50 FCPS Settlement Accepted by Jane Doe and AF Legal

In the first week of December 2025, FCPS offered a settlement of $50 compensation and legal fees to now-graduated Jane Doe. This settlement occurred nearly two months after her legal team, AF Legal, refiled the Jane Doe v. Fairfax County School Board (case: 2024-03171) in federal court: Doe v. Fairfax County School Board (1:25-cv-01662). Jane Doe accepted the offer, despite the offer stipulating that FCPS did not admit fault and the settlement would not change FCPS policies regarding transgender students using pronouns, names, and bathrooms that match their gender identity. 

This case has been ongoing since March 2024. 4 Public Education has been following this case, and has attended hearings which are described in these blogs: Part 1 (July 2024), Part 2 (August 2024), and Part 3 (December 2024). It is unknown how much this case has cost Fairfax County taxpayers; however, FCPS made it clear that they offered the settlement to avoid a long and expensive legal effort without ceding to any of AF Legal’s demands. 

Despite this relatively small financial settlement, AF Legal has declared this a “victory” and pushed their victory on various conservative media venues. How is it a “victory” if AF Legal did not achieve the stated goals of the lawsuit? If they failed, once again, to overturn FCPS policies that support and protect the civil rights of transgender students, it seems like a loss, right? This should lead any observer to question the intent, narrative, and actions of AF Legal.

US DOJ Sues LCPS Over AF Legal Lawsuit

On December 8, 2025, Trump’s U.S. Department of Justice made a motion to intervene, and sue LCPS for “violating Equal Protection of Christian students.” This involvement by DOJ will likely increase legal costs even greater for LCPS, Loudoun County taxpayers, and those who pay federal taxes.

This case is related to S.W., et al. v. LCSB (Case No. 1:25-cv-01536, East. District of VA) where the plaintiffs are represented by the Founding Freedoms Law Center and AF Legal. Interestingly, far right news sources and officials have presented the harassment of a transgender student as mere “discomfort” expressed by the two cisgender students, but the August 15, 2025 LCPS Title IX Investigation Determination in the court documents demonstrated evidence of threats and long-term sex-based harassment against the transgender student by the two plaintiffs.

On the surface, the case of S.W., et al v LCSB is an attempt to overturn the suspensions of the two cisgender students who allegedly committed harassment in the locker room; however, the case is ultimately challenging LCPS’s ability to enforce its own anti-discrimination policies that protect and support transgender students. 

Earlier this year, AG Miyares investigated LCPS, filed a referral of the case to US ED OCR and US DOJ Civil Rights Division, and on October 1, 2025, Miyares filed an Amicus Brief in support of the students whose alleged harassment of a transgender student in a LCPS locker room resulted in their suspension. 

After AG Miyares lost his 2025 election, it is not surprising that the DOJ is now involved. Even more significant are the relationships between AF Legal and the DOJ. At a recent Moms for Liberty event, Ian Prior, AF Legal counsel, detailed AF Legal’s connections to the current Trump administration (e.g., Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the US Department of Justice and David Warrington, White House Counsel). In fact, Dhillon’s law firm has close connections to Prior, as well. These connections should concern anyone who cares about influence, accountability, and transparency in government.

AF Legal Locker Room Lawsuit Turns to Conspiracy Allegations

In related news, S.W., et al. v. LCSB was amended on October 29, 2025 to include additional claims about the defendant and bizarre conspiracy allegations against a beloved local organization, Loudoun for All, a political action committee focused on social justice and equity. It seems the amended case is directly related to Loudoun for All’s press releases about the threats and sexual harassment incidents against a transgender student associated with the Stone Bridge High School locker room incident and Title IX investigation.

Of course, this is not the first time Prior, the AF Legal lawyer on the case, has targeted Loudoun for All or its members. A quick review of Loudoun news media confirms that there has been conflict for several years among the parties, which begs the question of whether this case in federal court is becoming personal, rather than just legal. Is it infringing on the free speech rights of individuals and a political organization?

Abortion Scandal Allegations Awaiting Dismissal in Federal Court

Less than a month after the defamation case was filed in Fairfax Circuit Court, Zenaida Perez vs. Fairfax County Public Schools, et al. (CL-2025-0016376), it was refiled in federal court. This feels like an odd choice after Americans United for Life held a press conference for Perez in front of the Fairfax County Circuit Court on October 29, 2025 with media, Patti Lyman (Republican National Committeewoman for Virginia), her lawyers, and Julie Perry her friend and fellow Centreville High School teacher, present. Please read 4 Public Education’s previous coverage of the manufactured abortion scandal in FCPS Blows Apart the "Abortion Scandal." 

Despite the shocking allegations by Perez, the preliminary FCPS investigation indicated that her allegations “are very likely untrue and lacking in factual or evidentiary support.” It is unknown how much the FCPS investigation by King and Spaulding and outside legal fees have cost FCPS taxpayers thus far; however, Project 2025 contributor IWF has claimed that FCPS spent $980,515.14 on the investigation by King and Spaulding. If that is what has been spent in a two-month investigation, then this case will be quite costly.

Per court filings in Perez v. Fairfax County Public Schools (1:25-cv-02126), FCPS has until December 16, 2025 to file a Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's opposition brief to the Motion to Dismiss is due by January 7, 2026.