Paxton sues adult swimming organization that allowed tans women to compete in Texas race
Paxton's lawsuit against U.S. Masters Swimming, a national membership-based nonprofit for adults of varying skill levels, follows an investigation into the organization he announced in May to determine whether it violated Texas's consumer protection laws by permitting transgender women to participate in events marketed as women's sporting events.
In July, under pressure from Paxton and public calls for the organization to ban trans women from competing, U.S. Masters Swimming implemented new interim eligibility rules that authorize swimmers to participate in events that best align with their gender identity but do not allow trans women to win competitive awards or titles, score points or be ranked in the women's category.
'This is all too little, too late,' Paxton, who is currently locked in a contentious Senate primary with incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), wrote in Thursday's lawsuit. 'U.S. Masters Swimming cannot save itself from the damage that it has done. U.S. Master's Swimming swindled countless women and it must be held accountable.'
The organization, according to Paxton's lawsuit, violated Texas's Deceptive Trade Practices Act by allowing transgender women to participate in women's events at its Spring Nationals in San Antonio this year. During that competition, 47-year-old Ana Caldas, one of the trans women competing, placed first in her age group in five separate women's races.
Paxton said U.S. Masters Swimming had broken the state's law because 'consumers did not know that biological men were competing in the women's events.' His office is seeking up to $10,000 for each alleged violation.
In an emailed statement, U.S. Masters Swimming said it had been 'cooperating fully' with the investigation launched in May and had not been contacted by Paxton's office regarding the lawsuit.
'USMS surprisingly learned yesterday via social media that the Texas Office of the Attorney General filed a lawsuit against USMS and the five [Local Masters Swimming Committees] that operate in the State of Texas. USMS is currently reviewing the allegations,' the group said.
The statement reiterated the new interim policy preventing transgender women from receiving records or awards in the women's category at U.S. Masters Swimming-sanctioned events. According to the organization's website, its policy aligns with 'applicable' rules set by World Aquatics, the international governing body for water sports.
Transgender women are effectively banned from competing in World Aquatics events under a 2022 policy that allows only swimmers who transitioned before age 12 to participate in women's events.
'USMS is a national nonprofit community of adult swimmers focused on health and fitness. It is deeply disappointing to see our organization and individual members publicly targeted in a lawsuit that appears to be more about generating headlines than seeking justice,' U.S. Masters Swimming said in its statement. 'USMS will continue to cooperate fully with the Texas Office of the Attorney General and to uphold the values that have guided our community for more than 50 years.'
On Tuesday, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier (R) also threatened legal action against U.S. Masters Swimming over its inclusion of transgender athletes, writing in a letter to CEO Dawson Hughes that the organization's policy violates state discrimination and public nuisance laws and defies President Trump's February executive order opposing 'male competitive participation in women's sports.'
Paxton, who has served as Texas's attorney general since 2015, has previously invoked state laws against false or deceptive business practices in arguing that transgender women should be barred from women's competitions in Texas.
In a 2024 lawsuit against the NCAA, Paxton claimed the organization violated Texas's Deceptive Trade Practices Act by permitting transgender women to compete in events it marketed as women's competitions.
'Consumers purchase goods and services associated with women's college sports because they enjoy watching women compete against women—not men competing against women,' he wrote in the lawsuit, filed in December in a Texas district court.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Democracy Upside Down
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Last month, President Donald Trump's administration scrapped a long-standing Texas law that provided access to financial aid for 'Dreamers'—undocumented immigrants, brought into this country as children, who grew up here, graduated from local high schools, and are committed to becoming permanent residents. The administration's allies tried and failed to persuade the state legislature, which is controlled by Republicans, to repeal the law, which has had nearly a quarter century of bipartisan support. So the administration made an end run around Texas's democratic process: The Department of Justice hatched a plan with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to kill the law, filing a joint motion that asked a federal court to declare the Texas Dream Act unconstitutional. A judge approved the motion the very same day. The whole process took just six hours. Whatever one's views are on Dreamer policy, the fact is that this maneuver went against the will of the people of Texas. The organization I lead, Democracy Forward, has, along with several other groups, filed a motion to defend the law. Texans deserve to have the constitutionality of their Dream Act judged in court, not killed off via a collaboration between the president and the state attorney general. And even more alarming than the Trump administration's dismantling of this law is that it's part of a broader effort to short-circuit democracy at the state level. State-level democracy is essential to America's federalist system. During another time in U.S. history when a majority of the Supreme Court was imposing barriers to the public's ability to self-govern, Justice Louis D. Brandeis famously observed, 'It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.' Later, Justice William Brennan argued that states have the 'power to impose higher standards' under state law 'than is required under the Federal Constitution.' Throughout America's long history, state-level innovations have pushed the country forward: Some states abolished slavery long before the Civil War, granted women the right to vote before the Nineteenth Amendment was adopted, and legalized marriage equality years before the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling. Of course, states have not always been on the side of human freedom and progress. Appeals to 'states' rights' have served as rallying cries for enslavers, segregationists, and others seeking to deny the rights of people and communities since the nation's founding. 'No state,' the Fourteenth Amendment proclaimed after the Civil War, shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' When America's system of government works as it should, the federal government steps in to prevent states from undermining human freedom. [David Frum: The courts won't save democracy from Trump] That's what America saw in 1957, when President Dwight Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard to implement a Supreme Court ruling to desegregate schools; the governor, an avowed segregationist, had refused to comply. President John F. Kennedy similarly federalized the Alabama National Guard to carry out desegregation orders at the University of Alabama, again over the objection of a pro-segregation governor. Now the president and his political appointees, not a state's governor, are ignoring federal-court orders. In April, a federal court found that the government had exhibited 'a willful disregard for its Order' that planes carrying migrants who had been denied basic due process be turned around until the court could hear the migrants' case. (Democracy Forward and the ACLU represent the migrants in that matter.) Two months later, in early June, Trump federalized the California National Guard and deployed active-duty Marines to Los Angeles without the approval of Governor Gavin Newsom, who argued that local law enforcement was fully capable of managing anti-ICE protests. Trump's move was a federal flex that made a mockery of state sovereignty and democracy, and created more chaos than it solved. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said that what she saw in a local park 'looked like a city under siege, under armed occupation.' To justify its actions in California, the administration invoked Eisenhower's 1957 move to enforce federal-court orders on civil rights. Yet Trump's actions aim for the opposite of Eisenhower's. Instead of using federal power to protect people's rights, Trump is misusing federal power to undermine them. That is democracy upside down. Similarly, when Maine insisted that it would defend transgender athletes' participation on women's college-sports teams, the president brazenly interfered. Maine was following the law as it argued was set forth in Title IX and the state's Human Rights Act, but Trump sought to force a new interpretation of the federal law through executive actions, including a February order. That month, Trump pronounced, 'We are the federal law,' at which point the administration began a process to cut off funding to Maine's public-school meal programs as punishment—funds appropriated by Congress to help children in need. 'See you in court,' Maine Governor Janet Mills told the president. She did, and Maine won. The administration has also attempted to usurp the power that the Constitution provides both Congress and the states. Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution mandates that only states and Congress can make or alter the 'times, places, and manner' of holding federal elections. Ignoring that, Trump, in an executive order, has sought to impose federal time, place, and manner requirements that create barriers to the ballot box. Much of this executive order has been blocked by two federal courts in response to litigation filed by 19 states, among other parties. One federal judge found that the requirements Trump is seeking to impose would create time-consuming burdens on states and could chill voter participation— 'the antithesis of Congress's purpose in enacting' federal election laws. (The Trump administration is also pressuring Texas Republicans to redraw congressional districts in the middle of the decade, outside the normal cycle, to skew the midterm elections.) [Adam Serwer: Trump is wearing America down] The Trump administration has called lawsuits filed against its actions 'frivolous' and 'vexatious.' But as with so many of Trump's attacks, this is really a confession. The Texas ploy is just one of many ways the administration is undercutting the checks and balances in the U.S. constitutional system. The administration has eviscerated agencies and programs created by Congress, attacked judges and the legal profession as a whole, and attempted to stifle a free and open press through intimidation tactics. It's all in keeping with a theme: To empower one man, you need to disempower everyone else, everywhere else—including in states where laws are counter to the president's political agenda. What's happening in Texas, California, Maine, and other states goes beyond normal political disagreements or turf spats. This isn't the typical tug-of-war of federalism. The Trump administration is undermining foundational democratic principles and turning what are supposed to be 'laboratories of democracy' into laboratories of repression—something that should have no place in a nation founded on the promise of human freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
New York county clerk rejects Texas's effort to fine doctor in abortion pill case
A New York county clerk again rejected an effort by Texas to fine a New York-based doctor accused of shipping abortion pills across state lines, in a case that could tee up a US supreme court showdown between states that protect abortion access and those that ban it. On Monday, the acting Ulster county clerk, Taylor Bruck, rejected a court filing by Texas's attorney general, Ken Paxton, which sought to collect a $113,000 penalty against Dr Margaret Carpenter. Paxton had sued Carpenter in December 2024 over allegations she shipped abortion pills to a Texas woman in defiance of the state's ban on virtually all abortions. When Carpenter did not show up to a court hearing earlier this year, a judge automatically ruled against her and ordered her to pay the fine as well as stop mailing pills to Texas. However, New York is one of a handful of blue states that has enacted a 'shield law', which blocks state officials from extraditing abortion providers to other states or complying with out-of-state court orders. In his initial refusal to levy the fine, issued in March, Bruck cited the shield law. Related: Planned Parenthood offices begin rejecting Medicaid after Trump signs bill to defund healthcare organization 'The rejection stands. Resubmitting the same materials does not alter the outcome,' Bruck said in his response to Paxton on Monday. 'While I'm not entirely sure how things work in Texas, here in New York, a rejection means the matter is closed.' As a signoff, Bruck added New York state's motto: 'Excelsior.' The word means 'ever upward' in Latin. Paxton's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. After the first rejection, Paxton said in a statement that he was 'outraged'. 'New York is shredding the constitution to hide lawbreakers from justice, and it must end,' he continued. 'I will not stop my efforts to enforce Texas's pro-life laws that protect our unborn children and mothers.' Shield laws like New York's, which sprang up in the years since the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, have never been tested in court. However, anti-abortion activists are trying to change that, as they have grown increasingly frustrated by the accessibility of abortion through out-of-state travel and the availability of abortions pills through telehealth. Despite the wave of state-level abortion bans unleashed by the fall of Roe, the number of abortions performed in the US is still on the rise, in large part thanks to providers' ability to facilitate the procedure through shield laws. In December 2024, shield law providers facilitated almost 14,000 abortions in states that ban almost all abortions or that restrict telehealth abortions, according to #WeCount, a research project by the Society of Family Planning. Experts widely expect that the Texas case, or another similar case involving shield laws, will ultimately be decided by the supreme court. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Onus on athletes to let drug testers know where they are under "whereabouts" rules
A chunk of an Olympic and Paralympic athlete's life is spent telling drug testers where they will be every day and every night. Failure to provide that information can damage an athlete's eligibility to compete, even if they've never taken a banned substance. Penny Oleksiak won't be on Canada's swimming team at world championship starting Saturday in Singapore after running afoul of "whereabouts" requirements. From staying at a friend's house overnight in the off-season to training in remote mountains, athletes must be found for testing in order to avoid sanctions. The onus is on athletes to submit that information through the web-based Anti-Doping Administration and Management System (ADAMS) on a computer or on a mobile-phone app. Athletes must provide, on a quarterly basis, their addresses (home, hotel or otherwise) and every day must have an overnight accommodation entry. Also required is contact info, training and competition schedules and locations, time and location of school, work or medical appointments, and a 60-minute window each day that they're available for testing. If a grocery run or spontaneous decision to go to a movie conflicts with the 60-minute window an athlete offers as available for testing, ADAMS must be updated beforehand to provide an alternative hour. But athletes can also be tested at any time and any place with no advance notice. Whereabouts information must be sufficiently detailed so they can be found for testing. Swimming Canada said Oleksiak made "an administrative mistake" and failed to keep her whereabouts information up to date. Whereabouts and ADAMS are constants in an elite athlete's life. "It is part of our job," said Canadian race walker and Olympic medallist Evan Dunfee. "It is something that we sign up for." He recalled a 2017 vacation in Iceland where he was travelling in a recreational vehicle. "We didn't know where we were going to be stopping each night," Dunfee recalled. "We were just going to drive until we found somewhere nice and set up shop." That required a consultation with the Canadian Centre For Ethics in Sport. "I actually had to chat with CCES beforehand and say, 'hey, how do I follow the rules in this situation?' They said 'to the best of your ability, update it as best you can.' I think I ended up putting in my latitude and longitude," Dunfee said. The World Anti-Doping Code (WADA) defines a whereabouts failure as any combination of three missed tests or filing failures in a 12-month period, which the International Testing Agency stated Oleksiak did between October 2024 and June 2025. Oleksiak withdrew from the world championship and accepted a voluntary provisional suspension under World Aquatics anti-doping rules. The 25-year-old from Toronto stated in a since-deleted social media post her violation 'does not involve any banned substance' and added, 'I am and always have been a clean athlete." Under World Aquatics rules, if an athlete in the testing pool submits 'late, inaccurate or incomplete whereabouts that lead to (them) being unavailable for testing, (they) may receive a Filing Failure.' Canadian athletes receive training on how to navigate ADAMS and what information is required, said CCES Sport Integrity executive director Kevin Bean. "What we do with each registered testing pool athlete is they're required to do an online e-learning course, and they have a specific module that outlines how they work through the process to submit the whereabouts information, what ADAMS is, where it's located, the type of information that you need to submit, what the deadlines are," Bean said. "They're required to take that course upon entry and then it's available to them every year thereafter if they remain in the registered testing pool, but it is no longer mandatory for them to take it in the years after." The deadline for submitting whereabouts info for each quarter is the last day of the month preceding that quarter. Athletes receive email reminders a month before and 15 days out from that deadline, Bean said. There is flexibility to update ADAMS information after that quarterly deadline, Dunfee said. "Doing that three months in advance doesn't mean you can't change it," he said. "We have a specific email address that we can send to, and a text message line that we send last-minute emergency changes to our whereabouts, too, if for whatever reason we can't access the app, if there's an issue with it." Fluid schedules in different time zones can cause whereabouts mistakes, Dunfee said. "I had a case one time in Australia, where because of just getting my days confused, I missed the filing deadline for that quarter," he recalled. "It sent a lot of things into chaos and it was some very panicked emails an hour after I was supposed to have done this, sorting it out. I managed to correct it and get it OK." Dunfee says he spends about an hour a month inputting his information in ADAMS because knows his schedule fairly well in advance. He acknowledged keeping whereabouts information current is hectic for his more nomadic teammates. "I completely understand for some athletes, it's way more onerous than it is for me," he said. "We have athletes who are hoping to get into these races in Europe. "They might be on a start list for a race in Norway and a race in Belgium on the same weekend, and they're just waiting to find out which one they get into. Certainly there are cases that are much more complicated than mine." This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 21, 2025. Donna Spencer, The Canadian Press
