DOJ sues California over alleged Title IX violations on trans athletes
The department's Civil Rights Division sued the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF), which oversees high school sports in the state, over what it said was a pattern of 'illegal sex discrimination against female student athletes.'
Either agency has declined to bar transgender student-athletes from competing in line with their gender identity despite repeated warnings from the White House and a personal threat to the state's 'large scale federal funding' from President Trump.
Investigations launched earlier this year by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) found both the state Education Department and the CIF in violation of Title IX, the federal law against sex discrimination in schools that the Trump administration has said prohibits trans athletes from participating in girls' and women's sports.
An executive order Trump signed in February states the U.S. opposes 'male competitive participation in women's sports' and that allowing transgender student-athletes to compete in female sports violates Title IX's promise of equal athletic opportunity.
California's Department of Education and the CIF had until July 7 to sign a proposed resolution agreement with OCR that would have required public schools across the state to kick transgender girls off girls' sports teams and strip them of their athletic titles and records. Cisgender girls who competed against trans student-athletes would have been sent personal apology letters, according to the proposal.
On Monday, both the state Education Department and the CIF said they would not sign OCR's resolution agreement. Len Garfinkel, general counsel for California's Department of Education, wrote in a brief communication that the department 'respectfully disagrees with OCR's analysis' that it broke federal law.
A 2013 state law signed by former Gov. Jerry Brown (D) explicitly protects the right of transgender students to compete on teams that match their gender identity. The Justice Department announced in May that it is investigating whether that law conflicts with Title IX.
Representatives for California's Department of Education and the CIF did not immediately return requests for comment on Wednesday's lawsuit. A spokesperson for Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has clashed publicly with Trump over the president's threats to the state's funding and recent immigration raids in Los Angeles, did not respond to a request for comment.
In the debut episode of his podcast, 'This is Gavin Newsom,' in March, Newsom said he found transgender athletes in girls' and women's sports 'deeply unfair,' breaking with most other elected Democrats.
At a press conference in Modesto, Calif., the following month, Newsom, a likely contender for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, said he would be 'open' to a conversation about limiting trans athletes' participation if it were conducted 'in a way that's respectful and responsible and could find a kind of balance.'
Republican lawmakers and Trump administration officials have latched onto Newsom's comments about trans athletes, demanding the governor stand on his beliefs and act against their participation.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon called Newsom's remarks 'empty political grandstanding' on Monday after California's Education Department and the CIF declined to sign OCR's proposed resolution agreement.
'The Governor of California has previously admitted that it is 'deeply unfair' to force women and girls to compete with men and boys in competitive sports,' Attorney General Pam Bondi said in announcing Wednesday's lawsuit. 'But not only is it 'deeply unfair,' it is also illegal under federal law.'
Since Trump's return to office in January, the administration has aggressively pursued the issue of trans athletes, launching investigations into more than two dozen states, school districts, athletic associations and colleges and universities.
The University of Pennsylvania last week agreed to bar transgender athletes from its women's sports teams and remove individual women's swimming records set by Lia Thomas, a former student and the first trans woman to win an NCAA Division I championship in 2022.
In a letter addressed to the Penn community, J. Larry Jameson, the university's president, wrote that refusing to sign the administration's agreement 'could have had significant and lasting implications for the University of Pennsylvania.'
The Trump administration previously suspended $175 million in federal contracts awarded to Penn. That money was released to the school after it signed the agreement.
The Justice Department has also taken legal action against Maine over its refusal to ban transgender girls from participating in girls' school sports. Democratic Gov. Janet Mills called the suit 'an unprecedented campaign to pressure the State of Maine to ignore the Constitution and abandon the rule of law.'
In April, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (D) sued Trump and Bondi over threats to that state's federal funding if it did not comply with Trump's order to bar transgender students from participating on teams that match their gender identity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US-EU trade deal wards off further escalation but will raise costs for companies, consumers
FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) — President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have announced a sweeping trade deal that imposes 15% tariffs on most European goods, warding off Trump's threat of a 30% rate if no deal had been reached by Aug. 1. The tariffs, or import taxes, paid when Americans buy European products could raise prices for U.S. consumers and dent profits for European companies and their partners who bring goods into the country. Here are some things to know about the trade deal between the United States and the European Union: What's in the agreement? Trump and von der Leyen's announcement, made during Trump's visit to one of his golf courses in Scotland, leaves many details to be filled in. The headline figure is a 15% tariff rate on 'the vast majority' of European goods brought into the U.S., including cars, computer chips and pharmaceuticals. It's lower than the 20% Trump initially proposed, and lower than his threats of 50% and then 30%. Von der Leyen said the two sides agreed on zero tariffs on both sides for a range of 'strategic' goods: Aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, and some natural resources and critical raw materials. Specifics were lacking. She said the two sides 'would keep working' to add more products to the list. Additionally, the EU side would purchase what Trump said was $750 billion (638 billion euros) worth of natural gas, oil and nuclear fuel to replace Russian energy supplies, and Europeans would invest an additional $600 billion (511 billion euros) in the U.S. What's not in the deal? Trump said the 50% U.S. tariff on imported steel would remain; von der Leyen said the two sides agreed to further negotiations to fight a global steel glut, reduce tariffs and establish import quotas — that is, set amounts that can be imported, often at a lower rate. Trump said pharmaceuticals were not included in the deal. Von der Leyen said the pharmaceuticals issue was 'on a separate sheet of paper' from Sunday's deal. Where the $600 billion for additional investment would come from was not specified. And von der Leyen said that when it came to farm products, the EU side made clear that 'there were tariffs that could not be lowered,' without specifying which products. What's the impact? The 15% rate removes Trump's threat of a 30% tariff. It's still much higher than the average tariff before Trump came into office of around 1%, and higher than Trump's minimum 10% baseline tariff. Higher tariffs, or import taxes, on European goods mean sellers in the U.S. would have to either increase prices for consumers — risking loss of market share — or swallow the added cost in terms of lower profits. The higher tariffs are expected to hurt export earnings for European firms and slow the economy. The 10% baseline applied while the deal was negotiated was already sufficiently high to make the European Union's executive commission cut its growth forecast for this year from 1.3% to 0.9%. Von der Leyen said the 15% rate was 'the best we could do' and credited the deal with maintaining access to the U.S. market and providing 'stability and predictability for companies on both sides.' What is some of the reaction to the deal? German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed the deal which avoided 'an unnecessary escalation in transatlantic trade relations" and said that 'we were able to preserve our core interests,' while adding that 'I would have very much wished for further relief in transatlantic trade.' The Federation of German Industries was blunter. "Even a 15% tariff rate will have immense negative effects on export-oriented German industry," said Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the federation's leadership. While the rate is lower than threatened, "the big caveat to today's deal is that there is nothing on paper, yet," said Carsten Brzeski, global chief of macro at ING bank. 'With this disclaimer in mind and at face value, today's agreement would clearly bring an end to the uncertainty of recent months. An escalation of the US-EU trade tensions would have been a severe risk for the global economy," Brzeski said. 'This risk seems to have been avoided.' What about car companies? Asked if European carmakers could still sell cars at 15%, von der Leyen said the rate was much lower than the current 27.5%. That has been the rate under Trump's 25% tariff on cars from all countries, plus the preexisting U.S. car tariff of 2.5%. The impact is likely to be substantial on some companies, given that automaker Volkswagen said it suffered a 1.3 billion euro ($1.5 billion) hit to profit in the first half of the year from the higher tariffs. Mercedes-Benz dealers in the U.S. have said they are holding the line on 2025 model year prices 'until further notice.' The German automaker has a partial tariff shield because it makes 35% of the Mercedes-Benz vehicles sold in the U.S. in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, but the company said it expects prices to undergo 'significant increases' in coming years. What were the issues dividing the two sides? Before Trump returned to office, the U.S. and the EU maintained generally low tariff levels in what is the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world, with some 1.7 trillion euros ($2 trillion) in annual trade. Together the U.S. and the EU have 44% of the global economy. The U.S. rate averaged 1.47% for European goods, while the EU's averaged 1.35% for American products, according to the Bruegel think tank in Brussels. Trump has complained about the EU's 198 billion-euro trade surplus in goods, which shows Americans buy more from European businesses than the other way around, and has said the European market is not open enough for U.S.-made cars. However, American companies fill some of the trade gap by outselling the EU when it comes to services such as cloud computing, travel bookings, and legal and financial services. And some 30% of European imports are from American-owned companies, according to the European Central Bank. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump Repeats False Claim Beyoncé Was Paid $11 Million To Endorse Kamala Harris; Calls To Prosecute Singer, Oprah & Al Sharpton
On Saturday, Donald Trump repeated false claims that Beyoncé was paid $11 million to endorse Kamala Harris on the campaign trail in October of last year. The Truth Social post comes as the president faces scrutiny from his own base over the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Taking to his social media platform yesterday, the GOP leader wrote, 'I'm looking at the large amount of money owed by the Democrats, after the Presidential Election, and the fact that they admit to paying, probably illegally, Eleven Million Dollars to singer Beyoncé for an ENDORSEMENT (she never sang, not one note, and left the stage to a booing and angry audience!), Three Million Dollars for 'expenses,' to Oprah, Six Hundred Thousand Dollars to very low rated TV 'anchor,' Al Sharpton (a total lightweight!), and others to be named for doing, absolutely NOTHING! These ridiculous fees were incorrectly stated in the books and records. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PAY FOR AN ENDORSEMENT. IT IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL TO DO SO. Can you imagine what would happen if politicians started paying for people to endorse them. All hell would break out! Kamala, and all of those that received Endorsement money, BROKE THE LAW. They should all be prosecuted! Thank you for your attention to this matter.' More from Deadline Beyoncé Reunites Destiny's Child For Final 'Cowboy Carter' Tour Stop In Vegas Stephen Colbert Praises 'South Park's Naked AI Trump PSA: "An Important Message Of Hope" Donald Trump Denies Being Briefed That His Name Appeared In Jeffrey Epstein Files, Despite Wall Street Journal Report That He Was Informed Trump is referring to the 35-time Grammy-winning artist's appearance at a rally in Houston, where the singer took to the stage to endorse the vice president and call for unity. 'It's time to sing a new song, a song that began 248 years ago. The old notes of downfall, discord, despair no longer resonate. Our generations of loved ones before us are whispering a prophecy, a quest, a calling, an anthem. Our moment right now — it's time for America to sing a new song. Our voices sing a chorus of unity. They sing a song of dignity and opportunity,' she said to the crowd. Federal campaign spending records show a $165,000 payment made from the Democratic presidential candidate's organization to Beyoncé's production company, per CNN, with 'campaign event production' listed as the reasoning for the expenditure. Last year, senior spokesperson for the Harris campaign Adrienne Elrod told Deadline that the campaign did not pay any celebrity endorsers but was required by campaign finance law to cover costs associated with holding such events, per Federal Election Commission rules. This accounts for the $1 million the Harris campaign spent on Oprah's Harpo Productions, as the famed TV personality endorsed her at a Michigan-held 'Unite for America' event in September 2024. The baseless allegation was fact-checked by websites and PolitiFact last year, though Trump repeated his sentiments about Beyoncé, Oprah and Al Sharpton back in February. Trump has also previously harped on the matter in a post made back in May, where he named other influential Harris endorsers like Bruce Springsteen and Bono, calling for a 'major investigation.' There's also no evidence to suggest such expenses were incorrectly categorized, and though Trump maintained payment for endorsement is illegal, there's actually no FEC law that prohibits such campaigns for paying for endorsements, though they must disclose such expenditures. Best of Deadline Celebs Supporting Zohran Mamdani In New York's Mayoral Race: From Ramy Youssef To Cynthia Nixon The Fox News To White House Pipeline: TV Personalities Who Joined The Trump Administration Celebrities Voting And Encouraging Voting In The 2024 Election
New York Post
19 minutes ago
- New York Post
NYC's ‘We're With Colbert' rally for late-night host is a bust with just 20 protesters
What a joke. A Big Apple rally in support of on-his-way-out 'Late Show' host Stephen Colbert drew fewer than two dozen people Sunday — with even the NYPD cops on scene quickly calling it a day since most of the demonstrators left after just a few minutes. Organizers said the 'We're With Colbert' gathering outside the CBS Broadcast Center on Manhattan's West Side said it was meant to be part of a nationwide call for 'integrity.' Advertisement 4 Demonstrators gather outside CBS' offices in Manhattan on Sunday to protest the end of the 'Late Show' with Stephen Colbert. REUTERS 4 Colbert was told this was his last season on CBS, sparking controversy on both sides. CBS 'Our country is not perfect, never has been,' said the event's organizer, who would only identify himself as Matt and said his nickname is 'Slim.' Advertisement 'But we've always had the First Amendment, and now Mango Mussolini is trying to take that from us,' he said, referring to a derogatory nickname for President Trump. CBS said declining viewership and diminishing profits led to its decision to end the show in May 2026, effectively firing the 61-year-old talk-show host Colbert — but critics claim the network bowed to pressure from Trump. 4 CBS officials said the decision to fire Colbert was the result of growing costs and diminishing viewership. Luiz C. Ribeiro for New York Post 4 The number of protesters at Sunday's 'We're With Colbert' rally topped off at about 20 at its peak. REUTERS Advertisement CBS's parent company finalized an $8.4 billion merger with Skydance Media shortly after Colbert was told he was on his last season. The merger required federal approval. Colbert has also been among the top talk-show hosts who routinely roast Trump. 'This is a First Amendment attack,' a protester who refused to give her name said of the closing-down of the show. 'We can't stand for that.' Advertisement Still, Colbert has also come under fire for featuring predominantly lefty-leaning guests. According to the right-leaning group MRC NewsBusters, Colbert has had 176 liberal guests and only one Republican on his show since 2022.
