Ex-Washington state worker claims she was fired over school board vote on trans athletes
The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction faces a lawsuit from a former employee alleging wrongful termination. (Photo by Bill Lucia/Washington State Standard)
A former director at Washington state's schools agency alleges the state superintendent fired her after she voted as a local school board member in support of barring trans girls from competing in girls' sports.
Darby Kaikkonen filed suit last week against the state Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction and Superintendent Chris Reykdal in U.S. District Court in Tacoma. She says Reykdal retaliated against her.
'OSPI fired a high-performing employee, a military spouse, for exercising the rights and responsibilities of an elected official in standing up for women and girls, a viewpoint which the state superintendent disagrees with,' Kaikkonen said in a statement.
A spokesperson for Reykdal's office confirmed Kaikkonen stopped working there in March, but declined to comment further, citing personnel matters and the litigation. The state hasn't responded to the allegations in court, as of Wednesday.
Kaikkonen was the agency's director of student information before her termination in mid-March, according to the lawsuit. She had been there since December 2021. Before that, she worked for a decade at the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, including half-a-dozen years as the policy research director, according to her LinkedIn.
She also serves as president of the Tumwater school board, where she has been a member since 2019.
Tumwater, south of Olympia, has found itself near the center of the growing tensions between local, state and federal officials over how to handle transgender athletes in school sports. It's one of several districts bucking Reykdal's mandate to support trans students competing in the division that fits their gender identity.
In March, the Trump administration's Department of Education launched an investigation into Tumwater School District over allowing a transgender athlete from an opposing team to compete in a girls' high school basketball game. The investigation appears to still be ongoing, a district spokesperson said Tuesday.
President Donald Trump has sought to ban transgender athletes from participating in girls' and women's sports through executive order by, in part, withholding federal funding for districts that 'deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities.'
Some local school officials say they're in a bind: Either comply with state law and jeopardize federal funding, or follow Trump and risk punishment from the state. This week, California sued the Trump administration over threats to withhold funding tied to trans athlete participation.
Reykdal's office faces a federal probe of its own into its clash with a Clark County school district over the district's gender inclusion policy. Kaikkonen's work focused on reporting data for compliance with federal education policy, according to her lawsuit.
The week before the Trump administration opened its inquiry into Tumwater, the school board took up the matter of trans athletes.
At the time, the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association was considering two proposals related to trans athletes. The association sets policy for school sports in the state.
One of the proposals would have barred trans girls from participating in girls' sports. Another would have created a separate division where trans athletes can compete.
On Feb. 27, the Tumwater board, including Kaikkonen, voted in support of those rule changes. The audience watching the meeting in person responded with boos. In April, the interscholastic association voted down the proposed changes.
In a later meeting, Kaikkonen explained her vote. A former competitive swimmer, she said the issue 'pits one historically marginalized group against another,' transgender people and women. She said she 'fully supports' the transgender community.
'I see myself in this issue, and most importantly, I see girls who are currently living it and the complexity of what they're trying to work through,' Kaikkonen said. 'This is an impossible situation. These girls are faced with the same challenges that we all are, and that they can't possibly stand up for themselves and share their voice and what they think is right without being accused of bigotry.'
'You want to know why the voice for girls is quiet, and why so few people speak publicly about it?' Kaikkonen continued. 'It's fear.'
At the time, a spokesperson for Reykdal said his office was 'closely monitoring' the Tumwater school board's actions, and floated a 'possible formal investigation.'
A petition to recall Kaikkonen and other board members received over 1,500 signatures.
A week after the vote, she was placed on administrative leave from her job at the state, with no reason given, according to the lawsuit.
Less than two weeks later, in a March 19 call with the office's chief of staff, Tennille Jeffries-Simmons, she was fired, the complaint alleges. Officials didn't explain why, according to the lawsuit, which says she never faced disciplinary action at the agency.
Kaikkonen was reportedly expecting to go on leave due to an upcoming deployment to the Middle East for her Army reservist spouse.
'The termination came at a time when OSPI knew the financial and emotional hardship this punitive action would cause,' the lawsuit reads. 'As a result of her termination, Plaintiff has lost an annual salary of approximately $137,000, including valuable health and retirement benefits. She has experienced reputational damage, anxiety, humiliation, and disruption to her family life.'
The lawsuit alleges retaliation and wrongful termination. Kaikkonen seeks monetary damages to be determined at trial.
Kaikkonen's term on the Tumwater school board ends this year. She didn't file to run for re-election.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
3 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
SCOTUS deals huge blow to judges' power to rein in Trump in birthright citizenship case
The Supreme Court, in a victory for the Trump administration, limited the authority of individual federal judges Friday to issue nationwide injunctions against government actions that a judge has found to be illegal. The court deferred action on President Donald Trump's challenge to birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children, including the children of undocumented immigrants. But the decision deals a blow to individual judges' ability to rein in lawless actions by Trump or future presidents. 'Congress has granted federal courts no such power,' Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, wrote in the 6-3 ruling. Since Trump returned to office in January, she said, federal judges have issued about 25 nationwide injunctions against his orders and policies. Friday's ruling, on the last day of the court's 2024-25 term, did not prohibit nationwide injunctions altogether. Instead, Barrett said the orders Trump challenged on birthright citizenship must be blocked until lower courts decide whether they can be narrowed or must be overturned. Three federal judges have issued nationwide injunctions preventing Trump from enforcing his order against birthright citizenship. This follows a trend in recent years of a president's opponents seeking sympathetic judges to issue court orders halting executive actions. During Barack Obama's administration, a federal judge in Texas temporarily blocked the president from telling government agencies that they were legally required to let transgender visitors use restrooms that corresponded with their gender identity. During Trump's first administration, U.S. District Court judges issued injunctions blocking his executive orders that banned U.S. entry from a group of mostly Muslim-majority nations, orders that the Supreme Court eventually upheld after the president narrowed their scope. U.S. District Judge William Orrick III of San Francisco barred the administration from cutting off funding to 'sanctuary cities' that did not allow their police to cooperate with immigration agents, a ruling the Supreme Court upheld. And other judges issued nationwide orders, over Trump's objections, continuing the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which allows undocumented immigrants to live and work in the U.S. if they entered the country before age 16, had attended school or served in the military and had no serious criminal record. Although the case began as a challenge by Trump to birthright citizenship, the administration's lawyers asked the court to consider that issue in a future case after lower courts have reviewed it. The Supreme Court agreed. The Constitution's 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868 after the Civil War, grants citizenship to 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' except for children born to foreign diplomats or to soldiers of invading armies. The Trump administration's Justice Department argued that children whose parents were undocumented immigrants or visitors to the U.S. were not 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the nation and therefore could be denied citizenship. But California and 18 other states that challenged Trump's action said those children were bound by U.S. laws, including criminal laws, and were clearly under the nation's 'jurisdiction.' They also cited the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling upholding the U.S. citizenship of Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco to parents who had immigrated from China. In that ruling, a 6-2 court majority said the 14th Amendment 'affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, including all children born here of resident aliens.' The court reaffirmed the decision in a pair of cases in 1982 and 1985 that upheld citizenship for U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants. Trump's nationwide order enforcing his rollback of birthright citizenship has been blocked by federal judges in Washington state, Maryland and Massachusetts in lawsuits by Democratic-controlled states and the city of San Francisco and by immigrant-rights advocates. At the Supreme Court's hearing in May, D. John Sauer, the Justice Department's solicitor general, said the Trump administration would argue against birthright citizenship in lower federal courts before bringing the issue to the high court. Sauer focused instead on challenging the authority of individual federal judges in the citizenship case and others to issue injunctions ordering a nationwide halt to policies the judges considered unconstitutional. That practice 'encourages rampant court-shopping,' Sauer said, arguing that only the individuals who filed the suits should be allowed to benefit from the rulings while they are being appealed. But if that happened, said the states' lawyer, New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum, children and their families would rapidly migrate to states that recognized their citizenship. 'Our country has never allowed citizenship to vary based on the state in which one resides,' he told the court. The cases are Trump v. Casa Inc., No. 24A884; Trump v. Washington, No. 24A885; and Trump v. New Jersey, No. 24A886.
USA Today
3 days ago
- USA Today
Suspect of Minnesota lawmaker shooting to appear in federal court
Vance Boelter, who is accused of shooting two Minnesota lawmakers, faces six federal charges, including multiple counts of murder and stalking. If convicted, he will be eligible for the death penalty. The man accused of shooting two Minnesota lawmakers and their spouses is expected to appear in federal court June 27, where he will face a half dozen criminal charges and possibly the death penalty. After what police have called the largest manhunt in state history, Vance Boelter, 57, was arrested and accused of killing state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, and wounding state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette. Both lawmakers are members of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, and officials have called the killings a targeted "political assassination." According to a 20-page affidavit filed in federal court, Boelter planned extensively for the June 14 attack and wanted to 'kill, injure, harass and intimidate'' more than 45 Minnesota state and federal officials. Prosecutors say he also intended to target several other Midwestern lawmakers. "It is not an exaggeration to say that his crimes are the stuff of nightmares,'' Joseph Thompson, the acting U.S. attorney for Minnesota, said. "Boelter stalked his victims like prey.'' Boelter faces six federal charges, including multiple counts of murder and stalking, making him eligible for the death penalty if convicted. His appearance in court in St. Paul for a combined detention and preliminary hearing comes as Hortman, her husband and their dog are set to lie in state at the Minnesota State Capitol. What happened in Minnesota shootings? Before the attacks, Boelter compiled a list of mostly Democratic state lawmakers and their addresses, disguised his SUV to look like a police squad car, and purchased a silicone mask and a cache of weapons, according to the affidavit. Boelter disguised himself as a law enforcement officer and went to the Hoffmans' home in Champlin, about 20 miles northwest of Minneapolis, around 2 a.m. on June 14, prosecutors say. Boelter opened fire on the couple in what Thompson called a "chilling'' attack captured on video. 'Stuff of nightmares': How investigators say attacks on Minn. lawmakers unfolded Boelter then traveled to two other unnamed lawmakers' homes before going to the Hortmans' house and killing them, according to the affidavit. He allegedly exchanged gunfire with police outside the Hortmans' home before escaping into a wooded area. Authorities eventually tracked Boelter to an area near his family home in Green Isle, Minnesota, about an hour southwest of the Twin Cities. The next day, at 9:10 p.m., Boelter crawled out of a wooded area and surrendered to law enforcement. Who is Vance Boelter? Suspect in Minnesota shootings Boelter's wife told investigators he was a doomsday "prepper" who set aside passports, guns and hordes of cash in the event of a catastrophe, according to a recently unsealed complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Minnesota. At various times, Boelter has claimed to work in the food service industry. In other moments, he's claimed he runs large firms involved with 'security situations' overseas, including Africa, Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Who is Vance Luther Boelter? What to know about the man wanted in the 'assassination' of a Minnesota lawmaker Court documents say Boelter worked at Red Lion, a 'security company and fishing outfit in Congo, Africa.' David Carlson, 59, told Reuters that Boelter worked for an eye donation center near the house they have been sharing in Minneapolis for more than a year. Suspect will also face state charges Boelter is also facing two counts of second-degree intentional murder and two counts of second-degree attempted intentional murder in Minnesota state court. Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said she plans to obtain a grand jury indictment and upgrade the charges to first-degree murder, which carries a mandatory sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Contributing: Michael Loria, Eduardo Cuevas and Jonathan Limehouse, Christopher Cann, Terry Collins and Jorge L. Ortiz, USA TODAY
Politico
4 days ago
- Politico
Former Supreme Court Justice Kennedy says ‘democracy is at risk'
Former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy warned Thursday that acrimonious political discourse and threats to judges are eroding the ability of the United States to serve as an example of democracy worldwide. 'Many in the rest of the world look to the United States to see what democracy is, to see what democracy ought to be,' Kennedy said during an online forum about threats to the rule of law. 'If they see a hostile, fractious discourse, if they see a discourse that uses identity politics rather than to talk about issues, democracy is at risk. Freedom is at risk.' Kennedy, who stepped down from the court in 2018, avoided specifics during his 10-minute speech as part of a series of presentations by current and former judges. However, the Reagan appointee's remarks appeared to be triggered at least in part by strident attacks President Donald Trump has mounted against judges, including some whom he appointed during his first term, who have ruled against the administration's policies on immigration, firings of federal workers and his implementation of broad-based tariffs. In March, Trump attacked U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg as a 'radical left lunatic' after he attempted to block the administration from deporting alleged Venezuelan gang members under a wartime presidential power Trump invoked. Trump also called for Boasberg, an Obama appointee, to be impeached. Last month, Trump issued a social media post denouncing 'USA-hating' judges as 'monsters who want our country to go to hell.' The extreme rhetoric has come alongside a spike in threats against judges, although administration spokespeople have said the president opposes any threats and the Justice Department will prosecute them. 'Judges must have protection for themselves and their families,' Kennedy said. 'Our families are often included in threats.' Some other participants were more explicit in calling out Trump's salvos at the courts. While also not mentioning Trump by name, U.S. District Judge Esther Salas invoked the president's statements more directly, arguing they are akin to attacks on judges that have caused other countries to slide into authoritarianism. 'Judges are rogue. Sound familiar? Judges are corrupt. Sound familiar? Judges are monsters. … Judges hate America,' Salas said. 'We are seeing the spreading of disinformation coming from the top down.' Salas, whose son was killed and her husband wounded by a disgruntled litigant at their New Jersey home in 2020, said the U.S. Marshals Service has tracked more than 400 threats against judges so far this year. 'We're going to break records — and not in a good way,' said the judge, an Obama appointee. In his remarks Thursday, one day before his former Supreme Court colleagues are set to deliver their final rulings of the current term, Kennedy did offer some indirect praise for Trump. The retired justice repeatedly said he welcomed the ceasefire in fighting between Israel and Iran — a deal brokered by the White House. 'The world is celebrating what looks like, what we hope might be, peace for a period of time in the Middle East,' Kennedy said. 'Peace is what gives us the opportunity to make democracy stronger, to make freedom more attainable, to make freedom greater for ourselves and the rest of the world. We must always say no to tyranny and yes to truth.'
