Overview

Title

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to prevent the use of funds under such Act to teach or advance concepts related to gender ideology, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

This bill wants to make sure that schools don't use money from the government to teach about gender ideas that some people might disagree with. It means they want schools to focus on other things and not talk about gender stuff that might cause arguments.

Summary AI

H.R. 2617, also known as the "Say No to Indoctrination Act," proposes changes to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. It aims to prevent the use of federal funds to teach or promote concepts related to gender ideology in schools. By amending section 8526 of the Act, the bill seeks to restrict educational content linked to gender ideology, relying on definitions stated in a specific executive order concerning gender ideology extremism.

Published

2025-04-03
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2025-04-03
Package ID: BILLS-119hr2617ih

Keywords AI

elementary and secondary education act gender ideology say no to indoctrination act federal funds restriction educational content executive order 14168 gender ideology extremism legal disputes implementation challenges educational institutions

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
295
Pages:
2
Sentences:
9

Language

Nouns: 87
Verbs: 26
Adjectives: 7
Adverbs: 0
Numbers: 21
Entities: 29

Complexity

Average Token Length:
3.93
Average Sentence Length:
32.78
Token Entropy:
4.45
Readability (ARI):
16.74

AnalysisAI

Summary of the Bill

H.R. 2617, titled the "Say No to Indoctrination Act," is a legislative proposal introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2025. This bill seeks to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The amendment aims to prohibit the use of federal funds to teach or promote concepts related to gender ideology in public schools. The legislation references Executive Order 14168 for a definition of "gender ideology," suggesting that it involves the defense against gender ideology extremism and emphasizes restoring biological truths within federal institutions.

Significant Issues

One major concern surrounding the bill is the lack of a clear definition for "gender ideology" within the text itself. By leaving this term undefined, the bill opens the door to various interpretations, which could lead to inconsistent enforcement and implementation challenges across different educational institutions. This ambiguity not only complicates practical application but could also result in legal disputes among stakeholders regarding what is explicitly prohibited.

Additionally, the bill references Executive Order 14168, assuming that those impacted will have access to and understand this document. Without a clear summary or accessible explanation within the bill, stakeholders may struggle to comply due to a lack of clarity. Another point of contention is the use of subjective language, such as "gender ideology extremism," which might be interpreted differently based on individual or political beliefs.

Finally, the amendment alters the numbering of paragraphs in existing legislation, which could cause confusion if not properly communicated, particularly in legal or educational settings where precise references are crucial.

Broad Public Impact

If enacted, the "Say No to Indoctrination Act" could substantially influence educational curricula nationwide. Schools utilizing federal funds would need to carefully review and potentially modify their teaching materials to ensure compliance. This could create a restrictive environment where discussions around gender, identity, and related topics are minimized or avoided altogether—a situation that might impact how students understand these important social issues.

Moreover, the ambiguity surrounding the term "gender ideology" and the vagueness of what concepts might be considered related to it could result in a chilling effect. Educators might steer clear of these subjects entirely to avoid the risk of non-compliance, potentially stifling comprehensive education on gender and identity issues.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Educators and Schools: Teachers and administrators could face significant challenges interpreting and implementing the bill's provisions. The fear of inadvertently violating the law might discourage open dialogue and educational exploration related to gender topics. This environment could also limit teachers' ability to support students grappling with gender identity questions.

Students: The limitation or outright removal of discussions on gender ideology could prevent students from receiving a well-rounded education that reflects diverse perspectives. Such restrictions might also hinder students' ability to learn about and understand their own identities in meaningful ways.

Legal Professionals and Policymakers: The undefined terms and subjective language used in the bill risk leading to legal disputes and court challenges, potentially resulting in significant resource allocation toward legal defenses. Policymakers might also face criticism over the bill's ambiguity and lack of clear directive content.

Advocacy Groups: Organizations focused on gender rights and educational diversity may view this bill as a step back from inclusive educational policies. They might actively campaign against it, emphasizing the importance of representing various gender perspectives within educational frameworks.

In summary, while the "Say No to Indoctrination Act" aims to regulate the teaching of gender ideology in schools, its vague definitions and subjective language present several challenges. These issues could lead to broader impacts on educational content, possibly stifling discussions on important social topics and potentially leading to legal battles over its implementation.

Issues

  • The lack of a clear definition for 'gender ideology' in Section 2 could result in varying interpretations and implementation challenges, leading to potential legal disputes and confusion among educational institutions.

  • The reference to Executive Order 14168 in Section 2 assumes prior familiarity and understanding of the order, which might not be accessible or clear to all parties affected by this bill. This could cause implementation issues and legal uncertainty.

  • There is a lack of specificity regarding what constitutes 'concepts related to gender ideology' within Section 2, which could lead to inconsistent enforcement and a chilling effect on educational content.

  • The language used in Section 2, particularly the term 'gender ideology extremism,' is subjective and could lead to polarized interpretations based on individual or political perspectives, resulting in contentious debates.

  • The amendment in Section 2 that changes the numbering of paragraphs in the existing law could cause confusion in future legal or educational references if not clearly communicated or documented.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of this Act provides a short title and states that it may be referred to as the “Say No to Indoctrination Act.”

2. Prohibition on teaching gender ideology Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to add a clause that prohibits teaching or promoting concepts related to gender ideology, as defined by a specific Executive Order, in schools.