For some of Ohio’s most famously progressive colleges, a new state law banning transgender women from using women’s restrooms has triggered deep reflection among students, alumni, and administrators.
Antioch and Oberlin colleges—longstanding beacons of idealism and activism—now face difficult choices as they navigate this controversial law, which fully applies to private institutions. Unlike similar laws in other states, Ohio’s version allows individual colleges to decide how they will comply and enforce it.
A Clash Between Compliance and Core Values
For schools founded on principles of inclusion and social justice, any form of compliance feels like a betrayal of their core values. Oberlin has announced that it will comply with the law, providing counseling services and options for students wishing to move out of dorms. Antioch has yet to reveal a detailed plan, leaving its community in a state of uncertainty.
Ahri Morales-Yoon, a first-year nonbinary student at Antioch, expressed concerns that extend beyond bathroom access.
“It will cause a lot of fear and uncertainty,” they said. “It’s in the back of your head that this law is hanging over us.”
Antioch President Jane Fernandes emphasized that there hasn’t been a single restroom-related complaint during her tenure. She vowed that the college would continue to support transgender students despite the law.
“We will do everything we can to make it possible for transgender students to be very supported and safe here,” Fernandes affirmed.
Antioch, founded in 1850, has a long history of progressive values. After financial struggles forced its closure in 2008, it reopened in 2011 with a renewed commitment to social justice. Nearly 90% of its 120 students identify as LGBTQ+, and about one in six are transgender.
Top 10 Must-Read Books: A Guide to the Hottest Page-Turners
Alumni and Advocacy Push Back
Shelby Chestnut, executive director of the Transgender Law Center and chair of Antioch’s board of trustees, criticized the law as an attack on student safety.
“This is an outright attack on student safety,” they said.
The law mandates that multioccupancy restrooms, locker rooms, and showers be designated strictly by biological sex at birth. While ten other states have similar laws, Ohio’s is unique in its full application to private colleges.
Republican State Rep. Beth Lear, one of the law’s sponsors, defended its intentions:
“The point was that we’re treating our students equally across the board in Ohio,” Lear stated.
But critics argue that the law is part of a broader movement targeting transgender rights, following nationwide efforts to ban gender-affirming care for minors and limit transgender participation in women’s sports.
Oberlin’s History of Inclusion Tested
Founded in 1833, Oberlin has long been a trailblazer in social justice, admitting women and Black students before most U.S. colleges. It gained national attention in 1970 for introducing co-ed dorms and has since embraced gender inclusivity in campus facilities.
However, Oberlin’s decision to comply with the new law has disappointed many within its community. The college issued a statement asserting that compliance does not signal diminished support for its diverse student body, but some see it as a retreat from Oberlin’s progressive ideals.
English professor DeSales Harrison criticized the administration’s stance:
“It goes against the whole idea of Oberlin to refrain from making a decisive argument about what seems true and good in the world.”
Alumni like Kathryn Troup Denney have called for stronger resistance.
“When the law deliberately discriminates against one particular population of people, that’s when good people can rise up and say, ‘No, this law is not fair, it is not equitable, and it is not safe,’” Denney argued.
Students Find Ways to Resist
As students returned to Oberlin this spring, new signs marked restrooms as male or female, in line with the law. But acts of protest quickly followed—some signs were removed, and others were covered or altered by students opposing the change.
Oberlin’s student body president, Natalie DuFour, noted that the law doesn’t require active monitoring.
“Students, in theory, have the freedom to use whatever they want,” she said.
Antioch’s Fernandes echoed that sentiment, signaling that the college has no intention of policing bathroom use.
The Bigger Picture: Civil Rights at Risk?
Ohio’s bathroom law is part of a broader wave of anti-transgender legislation across the U.S., many of which have escalated under the Trump administration’s renewed focus on dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
Colleges like Antioch and Oberlin now face a critical dilemma: follow the law and risk alienating their communities or defy it and jeopardize government funding. For many students, faculty, and alumni, the stakes are not just about bathrooms—they’re about the very identity of the institutions they love.
As Shelby Chestnut put it:
“This isn’t just about restrooms. It’s about whether colleges will stand up for the safety and dignity of all their students.”
