Congressional Republicans grill unfazed San Francisco superintendent on gender policies

Congressional Republicans – At a Wednesday House Education and the Workforce Committee hearing, Republicans pressed San Francisco Unified Superintendent Maria Su—and other superintendents from Chicago and Loudoun County—on how their districts handle gender and sexual orientation issues.

For House Republicans. Wednesday’s hearing had the feel of a setup: the kind of cultural flashpoint they believe voters recognize instantly. and one they can use to test whether superintendents are truly accountable to parents. For San Francisco Unified Superintendent Maria Su. the moment landed differently—less like a target. more like an official insisting on process and law.

Rep. Tim Walberg. R-Michigan. chair of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. opened the session by saying Congress has a responsibility to ask questions when classrooms become “vehicles for political or ideological agendas.” He framed the hearing as direct questioning of superintendents about their approach to gender and related policies.

Democrats, though, challenged the premise of dragging district leaders before Congress. Rep. Jahana Hayes, D-Connecticut—a former teacher—argued the committee was chasing diversity programming while ignoring other crises. “This committee is spending time hauling you (superintendents) before Congress to answer for your diversity programs while we’ve had zero hearings on chronic absenteeism. zero hearings on the mental health crisis that we’re facing. no hearings on how we can infuse the teacher pipelines so that you have the qualified educators. ” Hayes said.

Su was one of three superintendents on the panel. The others were Aaron Spence, superintendent of Loudoun County Public Schools in Virginia, and Macquline King, superintendent and CEO of Chicago Public Schools.

The hearing came with a federal investigation already in motion. On Monday, the U.S. Department of Education announced that San Francisco Unified was one of four California districts that will be subject to a federal “compliance review” of its gender and sexual orientation policies. The review will consider whether the district is complying with two federal court decisions.

One of those decisions, Mahmoud v. Taylor, gives parents the right to opt out of LGBTQ discussions and curriculums that conflict with their religious beliefs. In the other case, Mirabelli v. Bonta, the U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a California state policy that advised districts not to inform parents of their children’s gender transitions in school.

Committee members questioned Su and the other superintendents about compliance with those court decisions. But they did not bring up the new federal “compliance review” of San Francisco Unified during the hearing.

When Su responded, she did not sound like someone trying to soften the district’s posture. She described San Francisco as a leader on LGBTQ rights and said the district was built around the belief that students need safe classrooms.

“The city is known as a pioneer in LGBTQ rights,” Su said. “We were one of the first to recognize the importance of teaching about our diversity so that students can learn and grow together. Students need safe and welcoming schools and teachers need support.”

That stance helped Su deflect what Republicans were aiming for. While Su had been superintendent for only 1 1/2 years, critics in the room tried to push toward broader accusations about what the district taught and how it handled sensitive disputes.

Rep. Glenn Grothman. R-Wisconsin. pressed Su to define “white supremacy culture. ” a concept he said he found in a professional development document for the district’s ethnic studies program. Grothman said he didn’t know anyone who believes in the concept. but argued that the presence of the term implies a belief in its existence. “Do you believe it?. Is it a problem in San Francisco?” he asked.

Su responded by narrowing the timeline. “The incident that you’re referring to happened before my time as a superintendent,” she said. During her 18 months as superintendent, she said, “I’ve spent my time focused on serving the 49,000 students that we serve.”

Rep. Burgess Owens, a Utah Republican, challenged another element he said appeared in the district’s revised ethnic studies materials. Owens pointed to language he said compared parents’ protests over Covid policies to white parents’ flight to private schools in the 1960s to avoid desegregation policies. Su answered by asking for a specific source.

“Thank you for that question. I’m sorry. Do you have the example that you’re reading from? Can I see, can I see the document?” Su asked.

Owens said he did not have the document, and pressed Su anyway. “Do you agree with that statement though?” Owens said.

Su replied she would need to see the text before responding. “I would need to see the document so I can speak,” she said.

Su’s approach stood in contrast to the harsher tone aimed at Spence and King. Several Republicans used language that made clear they were not just asking questions—they were escalating them.

Rep. Lisa McClain, a Republican from Michigan, criticized Spence for refusing to discuss disciplinary action involving a Loudoun County transgender student who filmed students in a locker room. McClain said his response was “pathetic.”

Rep. Mary Miller. R-Illinois. went after King. saying that unlike Spence and Su. King required the committee to subpoena her testimony after “vague and evasive excuses.” Miller said: “Transparency and accountability should not require a subpoena.” She added that Chicago Public Schools “is far more interested in sidelining parents and promoting radical gender ideologies than ensuring students can read. write and perform math at grade level.”.

While Republicans leaned hard on disputes about gender-related policies, two committee members from California took a different tack when their turn came. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord, and Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, commended changes Su said she made after listening to parents and the community.

They credited Su for reinstalling algebra in eighth grade. revising and somewhat tempering the district’s long-standing and controversial ethnic studies requirement. scrapping the former school board’s effort—amid Covid—to change schools named after Dianne Feinstein and Abraham Lincoln. and restoring fiscal stability to the district.

“I’ve been pretty critical of San Francisco Unified in the past, but I actually think there’s been some encouraging changes lately, and you’re relatively new to your role,” Kiley said. He also noted he is facing a tough reelection in a newly gerrymandered district.

Much of the confrontation at Wednesday’s hearing centered not on Su’s defenses, but on Loudoun County and Chicago’s handling of transgender students and the way Republicans described the resulting discipline.

Spence was pressed about accusations involving disproportionate discipline connected to a transgender girl who assaulted a girl in a locker room. He refused to discuss details.

Walberg and others then shifted focus to Chicago Public Schools’ materials and policies. Walberg said that Chicago’s third grade material asks students to. in his words. explain the difference between sex assigned at birth and gender identity. He said by fifth grade, Chicago introduces students to puberty blockers.

Walberg also argued that Chicago’s policy allows biological males on a case-by-case basis to sleep with biological females on overnight field trips. He said Loudoun County’s policy allows the same.

Both Su and the other superintendents said their districts comply with local, state and binding federal laws and accommodate parents’ concerns.

But for Republicans in the room, the bottom line was about access and control over private spaces.

Miller responded that the issue is “a huge national issue” and “a bipartisan issue,” adding: “Americans do not want males, boys, or men in the girls’ private spaces or their athletics.”

Walberg finished by returning to the hearing’s opening theme: parents. he said. should not be treated as people to be managed. “Bottom line. this was an important hearing. an emotional hearing. of course. but this is part of education. and parents should not be seen as entities to be managed if. indeed what you said today is true. that parents are integral to the success of your educational experience.”.

MISRYOUM Education News Congressional hearing House Education and the Workforce Committee Maria Su San Francisco Unified gender policies LGBTQ curriculum Mahmoud v. Taylor Mirabelli v. Bonta federal compliance review Chicago Public Schools Macquline King Loudoun County Public Schools Aaron Spence ethnic studies classroom policies parental opt out