This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Here's hoping the Alpine Board of Education is just posturing. If it really intends to forgo federal funding over the Obama administration's directive on transgender bathroom policy, Alpine's schoolchildren, not Washington bureaucrats, will pay the price.

The U.S. Justice and Education departments last month issued a directive that called on schools across the country to let transgender children use bathrooms of the gender they identify with. The memo was in part a response to legislation in a couple of states that required people to use the bathroom of their birth gender rather than their gender identity.

The directive drew a strong rebuke from those who consider it federal overreach, and Utah joined 10 other states in suing the administration over it. Three members of the Alpine board called it "morally reprehensible."

If the directive isn't overreach, it's certainly reaching. The administration arguably went further than the courts have in defining this as a civil right and therefore a federal issue. If it isn't a civil rights issue, then it rightly should be managed by the states along with the rest of public education. In that respect, the states' lawsuit could at least bring some clarity, even if most states have been managing this without need for a federal directive or a federal lawsuit.

In fact, the Utah Legislature already lined up pretty closely with the Obama administration with its landmark anti-discrimination bill last year. Senate Bill 296, the grand compromise between the LDS Church and LGBT leaders, specifically defined bathroom policies for employers, saying they can have sex-specific facilities "provided that the employer's rule and policies adopted under this section afford reasonable accommodations based on gender identity to all employees."

So is the Alpine Board willing to forgo its federal funding over a policy that aligns with the Utah Legislature's language on bathrooms and gender identity?

Practically speaking, losing $40 million in federal funds would be devastating to Alpine School District, which is among the lowest districts for per-pupil expenditures in the state that is the lowest in the nation for that. (Alpine is also the largest Utah school district with almost 12 percent of the state's total K-12 population.)

One board member said the district could operate more efficiently without federal regulations, but there is no way it would operate $40 million more efficiently. That would take more than 6 percent from the $627 million budget for 2016-17.

And exactly what corners would they cut? A lot of federal funds go to special education, which is expensive. Are they going to short those kids?

Whatever debate there is over the federal government's role, it does not justify harming children to make a point. That's morally reprehensible.