Trump admin puts California put on notice over transgender athletes: ‘Clear violation'
The US Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights determined that California's Education Department and Interscholastic Federation, which has received state funding, were in 'clear violation of Title IX' for having 'actively prevented this equality of opportunity by allowing males in girls' sports and intimate spaces.'
The civil rights office has given the Golden State 10 days to reverse course — or face 'imminent enforcement action' that could include a referral to the Department of Justice.
Advertisement
5 The US Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights determined that California's Education Department and Interscholastic Federation were in 'clear violation of Title IX.'
Getty Images
'Although Governor Gavin Newsom admitted months ago it was 'deeply unfair' to allow men to compete in women's sports, both the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation continued as recently as a few weeks ago to allow men to steal female athletes' well-deserved accolades and to subject them to the indignity of unfair and unsafe competitions,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement.
'The Trump Administration will relentlessly enforce Title IX protections for women and girls, and our findings today make clear that California has failed to adhere to its obligations under federal law. The state must swiftly come into compliance with Title IX or face the consequences that follow.'
Advertisement
The 1972 law is meant to protect equal opportunities regardless of sex in schools receiving federal funds.
5 California Gov. Gavin Newsom said on his podcast in March that it was 'deeply unfair' to allow men to compete in women's sports.
JOHN G MABANGLO/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
Most Americans — and as many as 69% of Democrats — support sex-segregated sports participation, a New York Times poll found in January.
Several Western nations — including the UK — have also banned or severely limited the practice of hormone therapy and providing puberty-blocking drugs to children, citing physical and psychological harms and the need for further study of long-term effects.
Advertisement
Past research studies show that transgender female athletes maintain a competitive advantage over their biological female peers even after undergoing hormone therapy to transition genders.
5 Trump's Education Department's word of warning for California also comes after the US Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law prohibiting hormone therapy for minors.
Image of Sports/Newscom via ZUMA
'It wouldn't be a day ending in 'Y' without the Trump Administration threatening to defund California. Now Secretary McMahon is confusing government with her WrestleMania days — dramatic, fake, and completely divorced from reality,' said a spokesperson for Newsom. 'This won't stick.'
The Trump Education Department's word of warning for California also comes after the US Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law prohibiting hormone therapy for minors.
Advertisement
To reverse course, the California educational entities must inform any recipients of federal funding to 'adopt biology-based definitions of the words 'male' and 'female,'' according to Trump's Education Department.
California's Interscholastic Federation must also 'restore to female athletes all individual records, titles, and awards misappropriated by male athletes competing in female competitions' — including Katie McGuinness, who placed second against a trans athlete in the long jump at the federation's Southern Section Final last month.
5 The US Education Department launched the investigation into California's interscholastic sports federation on Feb. 12 after the organization said it was going to flout the president's executive order.
Getty Images
California's Education Department must in addition 'send a personalized letter apologizing on behalf of the state of California for allowing her educational experience to be marred by sex discrimination.'
And the state office will have to annually certify that any recipients of federal funds are in compliance with Title IX.
In California, there are nearly 6 million K-12 athletes but fewer than 10 are transgender, a state official noted. Just around 10 are transgender of the more than 500,000 NCAA student-athletes nationally.
The Education Department launched the investigation into the state's interscholastic sports federation on Feb. 12 after the organization said it was going to flout the president's executive order preventing transgender athletes from competing in women's and girls' sports.
5 Katie McGuinness placed second against a trans athlete in the long jump at the California state federation's Southern Section Final last month.
FOX News
Advertisement
The department has dubbed June 'Title IX Month' and is 'commemorating women's continued push for equal educational and athletic opportunity.'
Reps for California's Education Department, Interscholastic Federation did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC Sports
39 minutes ago
- NBC Sports
How to watch USMNT vs Mexico: Gold Cup final stream link, TV channel, team news, prediction
For the 8th time in CONCACAF Gold Cup history (18 tournaments), the USMNT and Mexico are set to face off in the final of the 2025 edition at NRG Stadium in Houston, Texas, on Sunday (7 pm ET). MORE — Gold Cup schedule | Club World Cup knockout bracket The Americans have won just two of seven finals against their southern rivals, though they did come out on top in the last such meeting, in 2021 (1-0 at Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas, on Miles Robinson's 117th-minute goal). El Tri have won a record nine Gold Cups, while the USMNT will close the gap to just one if they lift no. 8 this weekend. How to watch USMNT vs Mexico live, stream link and start time Kick off time: 7 pm ET, Sunday How to watch: Fox, TUDN Stream online: or the FOX Sports app USMNT focus, team news Diego Luna has used this Gold Cup as his personal playground and breakout moment with three goals, including both in the USMNT's 2-1 victory over Guatemala in the semifinals, and two assists through five games. The 21-year-old Real Salt Lake star has been flanked in midfield, and frequently on the scoresheet, by Malik Tillman (three goals and two assists of his own) to form a dangerous one-two punch that can make a real case for a place in the starting XI next summer when the 2026 World Cup is played in the United States, Mexico and Canada. But can they deliver once more, against the best that CONCACAF has to offer, in perhaps the biggest game of their young careers? Mexico focus, team news The Gold Cup would be Mexico's second trophy of 2025 after Javier Aguirre's side won the 2024-25 Nations League back in March. Raul Jimenez has scored twice this tournament, including the game's only goal to beat Honduras and book Mexico's place in the final. Center back Cesar Montes scored three goals during the group stage and played all 90 minutes to secure the clean sheet against Honduras. USMNT vs Mexico prediction A cagey affair, as finals often are. Three of the eight finals finished 1-0, including each of the last two (2019 and 2021). A first trophy for Mauricio Pochettino as USMNT boss. USA 1-0 Mexico.
USA Today
41 minutes ago
- USA Today
How Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is standing out from her liberal colleagues
From the Supreme Court's mahogany bench, the newest justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, has sparred with Amy Coney Barrett and other voices of the right. Moneyed interests and power are among her targets. WASHINGTON − After Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett announced from the court's mahogany bench last month that lower court judges had gone too far in pausing President Donald Trump's changes to birthright citizenship, the court's liberals got their turn. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the most senior of the three justices appointed by Democratic presidents, read parts of the trio's joint dissent for about twice as long as Barrett had described the conservative majority's opinion. She even added a line that doesn't appear in the written version. 'The other shoe has dropped on presidential immunity,' Sotomayor said, referencing the court's landmark 2024 decision limiting when presidents can be prosecuted for actions they take in office. But it was a separate written dissent from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson that reverberated the most, in large part because of Barrett's scathing reaction to it. 'We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,' Barrett wrote. More: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson can throw a punch. Literally. Jackson's words repeatedly drew attention It wasn't the first time in recent months that Jackson's words drew attention. In a case about air pollution rules, Jackson said the case "gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens.' When her conservative colleagues gave Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency complete access to the data of millions of Americans kept by the U.S. Social Security Administration, Jackson said the court was sending a 'troubling message" that it's departing from basic legal standards for the Trump administration. Speaking at a judge's conference in May, Jackson condemned the attacks Trump and his allies were making on judges who ruled against his policies. Her warning that the 'threats and harassment' could undermine the Constitution and the rule of law was stronger than concerns expressed by Sotomayor and by Chief Justice John Roberts. And during the eight months that the justices heard cases, Jackson – the court's newest member in an institution that reveres seniority – once again spoke by far the most. 'I definitely do think Justice Jackson really prioritizes developing her own jurisprudence and thoughts and voice,' said Brian Burgess, a partner at the law firm Goodwin who clerked for Sotomayor. 'I can see Justice Jackson evolving into someone that wants to speak directly to the public to express the concerns of that side of the court.' A clock, a mural, a petition: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's chambers tell her story Jackson spoke up early and often Nominated by President Joe Biden in 2022 to succeed Justice Stephen Breyer, Jackson wasted no time being heard. During her first two weeks on the court, she spoke more than twice as many words as any of her colleagues. When asked about her volubility, Jackson has said she became used to operating solo on the bench during her eight years as a federal trial court judge. She hasn't shown many signs of adjusting. Since October, Jackson spoke 50% more words on the bench than Sotomayor who was the next talkative, according to statistics compiled by Adam Feldman and Jake S. Truscott for the Empirical SCOTUS blog. 'She's the only one that has ever done what she's doing in terms of total volume of speech in her first few terms,' said Feldman, a lawyer and political scientist. `She wanted me my voice.' Jackson has been working on her communications skills since elementary school when her mother enrolled her in a public speaking program. 'She wanted me to get out there and use my voice,' Jackson said during an appearance at the Kennedy Center last year to talk about her memoir. And it's not just her voice. Jackson wrote more – either opinions, concurrences or dissents – this term than anyone except Justice Clarence Thomas, according to Empirical SCOTUS blog. Steve Vladeck, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, said he is going to add her dissent in the air pollution case to his course on federal courts. 'She is calling things as she sees them,' Vladeck said on the liberal Strict Scrutiny podcast. Jackson went further than her liberal colleagues Jackson went further in that case, and in some others, than her liberal colleagues. Sotomayor wrote her own dissent of the majority's ruling that fuel producers can challenge California emissions standards under a federal air pollution law. And Kagan was in the 7-2 majority. In fact, Kagan was in the majority more often this term than all but Roberts, Barrett and Justice Brett Kavanaugh – the three conservatives who often control the direction of the court. Jackson was in the majority the least often. 'You see Justice Kagan really shifting away from Justices Sotomayor and Jackson,' legal analyst Sarah Isgur said on the podcast Advisory Opinion where she dissects the court with fellow conservatives. Different ways of being influential Burgess, the former Sotomayor clerk, disputed that. He said the times Kagan voted against both Sotomayor and Jackson were not high-profile defections. For example, in the air pollution case, Burgess suspects Kagan agreed with Jackson that the court should not have heard the fuel producers' appeal in part because their underlying complaint was likely to be addressed by the Trump administration. But once they took the case, the justices decided the legal issue in a way that didn't break a lot of new ground, he said. 'I think she seems to be more interested in coalition building and finding ways to eke out wins,' Burgess said of Kagan's overall style. 'That's one way to be influential. Another way to be influential is to try to stake out different views and hope that history comes along to your position over time.' Attack on `pure textualism' In one of Jackson's strong dissents, in a case about whether the Americans with Disabilities Act protected a disabled retiree whose health benefits were reduced, Sotomayor was on board – except for a footnote. In that lengthy paragraph, Jackson criticized her conservative colleagues' use of 'pure textualism' as 'certainly somehow always flexible enough to secure the majority's desired outcome.' 'She's saying what I think so many of us have been thinking,' Vladeck said on the podcast. He wondered whether Sotomayor didn't sign onto that footnote because she didn't agree with it or because she wanted to 'let Jackson have it for herself and not take credit for what really is an unusually strong accusation of methodological manipulation by one of the justices.' `With deep disillusionment, I dissent.' Strong accusations flew in both directions about the court's ruling limiting the ability of judges to pause Trump's policies. In her solo dissent, Jackson called the majority's 'legalese' a smokescreen obscuring a 'basic question of enormous legal and practical significance: May a federal court in the United States of America order the Executive to follow the law?' 'The very institution our founding charter charges with the duty to ensure universal adherence to the law now requires judges to shrug and turn their backs to intermittent lawlessness,' she wrote. 'With deep disillusionment, I dissent.' Barrett said there's no dispute that presidents must obey the law. 'But the Judiciary does not have unbridled authority to enforce this obligation – in fact, sometimes the law prohibits the Judiciary from doing so,' she wrote. Jackson, Barrett said, would 'do well to heed her own admonition' that everyone from the president on down is bound by the law. 'That goes for judges too,' she wrote. A focus on real-world impact and individual rights Legal commentator David Lat said Barrett's response departed from her usual 'rather restrained rhetoric.' In a Substack article, Lat noted that Barrett once described herself as a 'one jalapeño gal' compared to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, for whom Barrett clerked, who had a 'five jalapeño' style. Feldman said it's possible that Jackson's willingness to vocalize her disagreements with her conservative colleagues is getting under their skins. In a February article about how Barrett and Jackson are shaping the future of constitutional law, Feldman said the two sharp legal minds approach cases from strikingly different angles on how the law should function and who it should protect. Barrett prioritizes legal precision and institutional boundaries while Jackson focuses on real-world impact and individual rights, he wrote. When people look back at the Trump case, he told USA TODAY, they will be talking about Jackson's dissent. 'That's probably the one from the term,' he said, 'that will last the longest.'
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump says Iran has not agreed to inspections, give up enrichment
President Donald Trump said on Friday that Iran had not agreed to inspections of its nuclear program or to give up enriching uranium. He told reporters aboard Air Force One that he believed Tehran's nuclear program had been set back permanently although Iran could restart it at a different location. Trump said he would discuss Iran with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visits the White House on Monday. Advertisement 'I would say it's set back permanently,' Trump said as he traveled to New Jersey after an Independence Day celebration at the White House. 'I would think they'd have to start at a different location. And if they did start, it would be a problem.' 5 President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One during a fight to New Jersey on July 4, 2025. REUTERS Trump said he would not allow Tehran to resume its nuclear program, adding that Iran did want to meet with him. Advertisement The UN nuclear watchdog said on Friday it had pulled its last remaining inspectors from Iran as a standoff deepens over their return to the country's nuclear facilities bombed by the United States and Israel. The US and Israel say Iran was enriching uranium to build nuclear weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. Israel launched its first military strikes on Iran's nuclear sites in a 12-day war with the Islamic Republic three weeks ago. 5 A satellite image of the Fordow Facility in Iran after the US bombardment on June 27, 2025. AP Advertisement 5 The US sent B-2 Stealth Bombers to the Fordow site while nuclear-powered submarines fired ballistic missiles at Isfahan and Natanz sites, south of Tehran. Rob Jejenich / NY Post Design The International Atomic Energy Agency's inspectors have not been able to inspect Iran's facilities since then, even though IAEA chief Rafael Grossi has said that is his top priority. Iran's parliament has passed a law suspending cooperation with the IAEA until the safety of its nuclear facilities can be guaranteed. While the IAEA says Iran has not yet formally informed it of any suspension, it is unclear when the agency's inspectors will be able to return to Iran. Advertisement Iran has accused the agency of effectively paving the way for the bombings by issuing a damning report on May 31 that led to a resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations. 5 Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks during a meeting in Tehran on June 15, 2025. 5 President Trump salutes B-2 Bombers during a flyover at the White House alongside first lady Melania Trump on July 4, 2025. via REUTERS The US and Israeli military strikes either destroyed or badly damaged Iran's three uranium enrichment sites. But it was less clear what has happened to much of Iran's nine tons of enriched uranium, especially the more than 880 pounds enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.
