Minnesota House fails to pass bill banning trans athletes from participating in women's sports
HF12 needed 68 House votes for passage, but the bill fell one vote short with 67 affirmative votes to 66 negative votes.
The act stated that "only female students may participate in an elementary or secondary school level athletic team or sport that an educational institution has restricted to women and girls."
"Female means a female as biologically determined by genetics and defined with respect to an individual's reproductive system," the bill mentions.
A rally of supporters and opponents was seen at the Capitol, as they awaited the final vote.
The Minnesota House had some "emotional discussion" before the bill was eventually voted on, and Republican state Rep. Peggy Scott, who sponsored the act, was among those who spoke.
"We cannot allow our girls to be vulnerable to losing their spot on the team, being on the podium, or to injury by a male teammate or male competitor," she said. "That is not safe and that is not fair to our girls."
"We have women and girls around the world that are so afraid of competing with biological men that they are dropping out of sports," Republican state Rep. Marion Rarick added in support of the bill, referencing a 2024 United Nations report on violence against women and girls.
However, opponents of the bill pointed to trans discrimination in their arguments.
"All children deserve to play," Democratic state Rep. Brion Curran, the Minnesota Queer Legislators Caucus chair, said. "We will not be complacent with this hateful and dangerous anti-trans rhetoric."
Democratic state Rep. Liish Kozlowski added that the act was "a bill to bully trans girls and non-binary kids."
While this heated debate was going on, the Senate voted on Monday on a bill banning trans athletes from competing in women's sports. The bill didn't get the 60 votes needed to go through, which means at least seven Democrats didn't vote yes.
Trump's executive order last month directed the Education Department to inform school systems, as well as colleges, that forcing girls and women to compete with transgender females is a violation of Title IX.
After the order was signed, the NCAA revised its own policy on trans athletes in women's sports, though the revision has been seen as controversial by some.
Despite the executive order, the Minnesota State High School League announced it would continue letting trans athletes participate in girls' sports, arguing that the Minnesota Human Rights Act and their state constitution deem them eligible.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, though, wrote a letter late last month warning of the consequences of not passing the "Preserving Girls' Sports Act."
"The Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights has begun a Title IX investigation into the Minnesota State High School League," the letter from Bondi read. "If the Department of Education's investigation shows that relevant Minnesota entities are indeed denying girls an equal opportunity to participate in sports and athletic events by requiring them to compete against boys, the Department of Justice stands ready to take all appropriate action to enforce federal law."
State Democratic Rep. Leigh Finke said a trans athlete issue in the United States doesn't exist.
"Minnesota has been inclusive for 10 years. We've had zero problems," Finke said. "But we are doing this for political reasons. And when you lie about a community for long enough, people will believe it."
Republican state Rep. Peggy Bennett saw it entirely differently.
"This bill is about fairness, safety and preserving girls sports in Minnesota."
If the bill were to have passed in the House on Monday, it still wouldn't have been signed by Gov. Tim Walz, a strong advocate for transgender rights who was expected to veto it.
Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
23 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump considers skipping G20 summit, slams South Africa's 'very bad' policies
United States President Donald Trump has indicated he may not attend the upcoming G20 summit scheduled to take place in South Africa this November, citing his disapproval of the country's policies. President Trump may skip the upcoming G20 summit in South Africa due to policy disagreements. Tensions between the U.S. and South Africa have escalated over issues including land reform laws, foreign policy stances, and relations with BRICS nations. Trump's potential absence highlights growing diplomatic friction, which could impact U.S.–Africa relations long-term. Trump's remarks come amid a deepening strain in U.S.–South Africa relations, fueled by long-standing disagreements over a range of issues including South Africa's land reform laws, its pro-Palestinian stance in the Israel–Gaza conflict, and its growing alignment with BRICS nations. These tensions have prompted the Trump administration to impose multiple sanctions on South Africa, including a 30% tariff on selected South African goods, a move that has further deteriorated bilateral relations. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said, 'I think maybe I'll send somebody else because I've had a lot of problems with South Africa. They have some very bad policies.' South African officials have yet to issue a formal response to the statement. However, analysts warn that Trump's comments could escalate diplomatic friction ahead of the summit, which many see as a pivotal opportunity for developing countries to press for more inclusive global governance. Trump's policy dispute with South Africa Since the start of his second term in 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump has intensified tensions with South Africa, reviving a diplomatic chill driven by ideological rifts and competing global alliances. His administration has openly criticized South Africa's growing ties with Russia and China, its opposition to Western foreign policy, and its leadership role in BRICS and the Global South. The strain deepened earlier this year when US Secretary of State, Senator Marco Rubio declined an invitation to a G20 preparatory meeting in Johannesburg, citing South Africa's alignment with anti-Western regimes. Soon after, the White House instructed the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria to avoid making logistical arrangements for the G20 summit, signaling a potential boycott unless South Africa altered its stance. The friction reflects Washington's broader frustration with Pretoria's increasingly independent foreign policy, including support for Palestine, resistance to U.S.-backed sanctions, and its decision to host Russian President Vladimir Putin despite an ICC warrant. With the G20 summit now in focus, Trump's administration sees South Africa as part of a rising bloc challenging U.S. influence. What began as diplomatic friction has grown into a full-blown policy standoff that could redefine U.S.–Africa relations for years to come. Trump's potential absence from the summit could have diplomatic implications, as it would mark a rare snub of a major global economic forum hosted on African soil.
an hour ago
Trump says Epstein 'stole' young women from Mar-a-Lago spa, including Virginia Giuffre
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump said Tuesday that Jeffrey Epstein 'stole' young women who worked for the spa at Mar-a-Lago, the latest evolution in his description of how their highly scrutinized relationship ended years ago. One of the women, he acknowledged, was Virginia Giuffre, who was among Epstein's most well-known sex trafficking accusers. Trump's comments expanded on remarks he had made a day earlier, when he said he had banned Epstein from his private club in Florida two decades ago because his one-time friend 'stole people that worked for me.' At the time, he did not make clear who those workers were. The Republican president has faced an outcry over his administration's refusal to release more records about Epstein after promises of transparency, a rare example of strain within Trump's tightly controlled political coalition. Trump has attempted to tamp down questions about the case, expressing annoyance that people are still talking about it six years after Epstein died by suicide while awaiting trial, even though some of his own allies have promoted conspiracy theories about it. Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's imprisoned former girlfriend, was recently interviewed inside a Florida courthouse by the Justice Department's No. 2 official, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, though officials have not publicly disclosed what she said. Her lawyers said Tuesday that she's willing to answer more questions from Congress if she is granted immunity from future prosecution for her testimony and if lawmakers agree to satisfy other conditions. Aboard Air Force One while returning from Scotland, Trump said he was upset that Epstein was 'taking people who worked for me.' The women, he said, were 'taken out of the spa, hired by him — in other words, gone.' 'I said, listen, we don't want you taking our people,' Trump said. When it happened again, Trump said he banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago. Asked if Giuffre was one of the employees poached by Epstein, he demurred but then said 'he stole her.' The White House originally said Trump banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago because he was acting like a 'creep.' Giuffre died by suicide earlier this year. She claimed that Maxwell spotted her working as a spa attendant at Mar-a-Lago in 2000, when she was a teenager, and hired her as Epstein's masseuse, which led to sexual abuse. Although Giuffre's allegations did not become part of criminal prosecutions against Epstein, she is central to conspiracy theories about the case. She accused Epstein of pressuring her into having sex with powerful men. Maxwell, who has denied Giuffre's allegations, is serving a 20-year-prison sentence in a Florida federal prison for conspiring with Epstein to sexually abuse underage girls. A spokeswoman for the House Oversight Committee, which requested the interview with Maxwell, said the panel would not consider granting the immunity she requested. The potential interview is part of a frenzied, renewed interest in the Epstein saga following the Justice Department's statement earlier this month that it would not be releasing any additional records from the investigation, an abrupt announcement that stunned online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of Trump's political base who had been hoping to find proof of a government coverup. Since then, the Trump administration has sought to present itself as promoting transparency, with the department urging courts to unseal grand jury transcripts from the sex-trafficking investigations. A judge in Florida last week rejected the request, though similar requests are pending in New York. In a letter Tuesday, Maxwell's attorneys said that though their initial instinct was for Maxwell to invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, they are open to having her cooperate provided that lawmakers satisfy their request for immunity and other conditions. But the Oversight Committee seemed to reject that offer outright. 'The Oversight Committee will respond to Ms. Maxwell's attorney soon, but it will not consider granting congressional immunity for her testimony," a spokesperson said. Separately, Maxwell's attorneys have urged the Supreme Court to review her conviction, saying she did not receive a fair trial. They also say that one way she would testify 'openly and honestly, in public,' is in the event of a pardon by Trump, who has told reporters that such a move is within his rights but that he has not been not asked to do it. 'She welcomes the opportunity to share the truth and to dispel the many misconceptions and misstatements that have plagued this case from the beginning,' the lawyers said.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
‘Anybody but Mamdani': 5 Groups Emerge to Raise Millions in Attack Funds
In the blood sport of New York City real estate, where comity can be hard to come by, the developers of some of the city's most prized parcels appeared to be in agreement about one thing when they met in private this week. Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic candidate for mayor, had to be taken down. 'Our goal is anybody but Mamdani,' Marty Burger, the chief executive of Infinite Global Real Estate Partners, wrote in one of two emails sent ahead of the meeting that were obtained by The New York Times. To help, Mr. Burger proposed that his peers start by putting in $25,000 each to a new super PAC, New Yorkers for a Better Future, or to seed other groups. He cited potential ad campaigns attacking Mr. Mamdani; spending plans to boost specific rivals; and other efforts to register and turn out thousands of voters who typically sit out Election Day. A month after Mr. Mamdani's primary victory stunned New York's business elite, its leaders have begun cranking open a powerful gusher of outside spending to try to stop the man whose socialist policies they fear could sour the city's business climate. But with fewer than 100 days to go, they are still very much searching for a unified plan that could work. On Monday, the men whose companies run the Seagram Building and Hudson Yards joined the call for one anti-Mamdani super PAC, while leaders of a different super PAC invited donors to a $1,000-per-person fund-raiser scheduled for Thursday. 'Fighting Mamdani is expensive,' the organizer, Betsy McCaughey, a former lieutenant governor, wrote on the invitation. 'But allowing him to win will cost you more.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
