
Lia Thomas, Title IX and $175M: Why Penn struck a deal with Trump
"TRUMP ADMIN BRINGS UPENN TO ITS KNEES."
That was the chyron across the screen on Fox News on July 1, as conservative host Laura Ingraham clapped for Education Secretary Linda McMahon and anti-transgender activist Riley Gaines.
More: Reaction mixed at UPenn to transgender swimmer Lia Thomas' records being rescinded
The trio was celebrating a controversial announcement made by the Education Department earlier in the day: The University of Pennsylvania, an Ivy League school in Philadelphia, agreed to work with the federal government to resolve an investigation into its campus. As part of the deal, the university sent apology letters to female swimmers who competed alongside Lia Thomas, a transgender former student who won a national title while competing for the school in 2022.
Read more: Lia Thomas records erasure illustrates NCAA transgender policy change
In 2022, trans rights advocates celebrated the moment as historic. Many conservatives have since criticized Thomas' win, arguing she had an unfair competitive advantage.
Penn also said this week it would bar trans athletes from participating in women's sports. That change had no immediate effect, though, since Penn no longer has any athletes who are trans women. Following an order by President Donald Trump that such participation was illegal, no university in the National Collegiate Athletic Association has allowed student-athletes who aren't assigned female at birth to compete in women's sports.
Read more: NCAA updates transgender athlete participation policy after Trump executive order
In exchange for Penn's concessions, the Trump administration took a step it has rarely taken since the government began targeting elite colleges: It lifted a pause on a multimillion-dollar chunk of Penn's federal funding, which had been frozen for months.
Some condemned the accord as another political assault on higher education. Others hailed it as a win for female athletes.
Trump v. higher ed: University of Virginia president to step down after pressure from DOJ
The education secretary seemed to view it as a blueprint for colleges that decide that working with the Trump administration is in their best interest.
"We hope that that agreement is going to be a template for other universities who acknowledge that there is no room for men in women's sports," she said on Fox.
March: $175 million frozen
In March, the federal government suspended roughly $175 million in contracts to Penn, alleging the university had violated Title IX, the primary law governing sex discrimination at schools, when it allowed Thomas to compete.
It wasn't long before professors started receiving stop-work orders on a wide array of projects. Research on preventing hospital-acquired infections, drug screening for deadly viruses and protecting against chemical warfare ground to a halt, the university said at the time.
The effects were immediately harmful, said J. Larry Jameson, Penn's president.
"Federal funding freezes and cancellations jeopardize lifesaving and life-improving research, the loss of which will be felt by society and individuals far beyond our campus for years to come," he said in a public statement on March 25.
That funding will now start flowing again, according to Madison Biedermann, an Education Department spokeswoman.
In a new statement on July 1, the university's president called the issue "complex" and said he was glad to have reached a resolution with the government.
"Our commitment to ensuring a respectful and welcoming environment for all of our students is unwavering," he said. "At the same time, we must comply with federal requirements, including executive orders, and NCAA eligibility rules, so our teams and student-athletes may engage in competitive intercollegiate sports."
'Negotiation' or 'extortion'?
Some higher education leaders criticized Penn's agreement as unnecessary capitulation. Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors, called it "negotiation in the face of extortion."
What Penn did sent a harmful message to trans students on campus, he said.
"At a meta level, universities can't sell out trans people to satisfy the ideological demands of a thug," he said.
Amanda Shanor, an associate professor at the Wharton School, said students have been divided over whether Penn's decision was the right one. The day after the announcement, she felt a sense of "sadness and rage" among faculty like herself.
"Are they going to leave Penn alone after this?" she said. "I don't know."
Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
12 minutes ago
- CBS News
Watch Live: House nearing final vote on Trump's "big, beautiful bill"
Washington — The House is nearing a final vote Thursday on President Trump's "big, beautiful bill" after Republican leaders overcame resistance from GOP holdouts in a dramatic overnight session and advanced the Senate version of the measure early Thursday morning. "We'll have the votes," House Speaker Mike Johnson said Thursday morning. "We'll land this plane before July 4th." Republicans are trying to approve the final version of the legislation ahead of the self-imposed Friday deadline to get the bill to the president's desk. After hours of delay, the House voted 219-213 to advance the bill, scoring a key victory for Johnson. Lawmakers began voting at about 9:30 p.m. EDT Wednesday, but didn't wrap up until about 3:20 a.m. Thursday, as GOP leaders and the White House spoke with holdouts for hours to overcome their objections. "What are the Republicans waiting for??? What are you trying to prove??? MAGA IS NOT HAPPY, AND IT'S COSTING YOU VOTES!!!" Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social shortly after midnight. Following the procedural vote, the House began debating the bill. Just before 5 a.m., House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries began addressing the chamber for a "magic minute," which allows the leader unlimited speaking time. Seven hours later, the New York Democrat is still addressing the chamber, pledging to "take his time" as he highlighted the Americans who he said would suffer because of the bill. "I rise today in strong opposition to Donald Trump's one, big ugly bill," Jeffries said as he began speaking. "This disgusting, abomination, the GOP tax scam, that guts Medicaid, rips food from the mouths of children, seniors and veterans, and rewards billionaires with massive tax breaks. Every single Democrat stands in strong opposition to this bill because we're standing up for the American people." Johnson is expected to speak after Jeffries concludes, followed by the final vote. House hardliners push back against Senate changes After the Senate approved the bill Tuesday, House GOP leaders had aimed to move ahead quickly on the signature legislation of Mr. Trump's second-term agenda, which includes ramped-up spending for border security, defense and energy production and extends trillions of dollars in tax cuts, partially offset by substantial cuts to health care and nutrition programs. But some House Republicans, who voted to pass an earlier version of the bill in May, were unhappy with the Senate's changes. Holdouts, including moderates and members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, met with Mr. Trump on Wednesday as the White House pressured House Republicans to vote for the bill. While some lawmakers described the meetings as productive, a number of conservatives said ahead of a rule vote Wednesday afternoon that they thought the procedural vote would fail. Johnson spent weeks pleading with his Senate counterparts not to make any major changes to the version of the bill that passed the lower chamber by a single vote in May. He said the Senate bill's changes "went a little further than many of us would've preferred." The Senate-passed bill includes steeper Medicaid cuts, a higher increase in the debt limit and changes to the House bill's green energy policies and the state and local tax deduction. Other controversial provisions that faced pushback in both chambers, including the sale of public lands in nearly a dozen states, a 10-year moratorium on states regulating artificial intelligence and an excise tax on the renewable energy industry, were stripped from the Senate bill before heading back to the House. Before the critical procedural vote ended, Johnson told reporters that Mr. Trump was "directly engaged" in conversations with skeptical members. "Members wanted to hear certain assurances from him about what's ahead, what the future will entail, and what we're going to do next, and all of that," Johnson said. "And he was very, very helpful in that process." In the wee hours on Thursday, five House Republicans had voted no on the rule vote, which was enough to tank the vote with a razor-thin GOP majority in the lower chamber, and eight possible holdouts had not voted. But the vote remained open as GOP leaders worked to shore up support, allowing lawmakers to change their votes from no to yes. Mr. Trump had taken to Truth Social as a handful of Republican holdouts didn't appear to be budging, declaring "FOR REPUBLICANS, THIS SHOULD BE AN EASY YES VOTE. RIDICULOUS!!!" Republican leaders ultimately won the support of about a dozen GOP opponents to the rule. And when the vote finally came to an end, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania was the sole Republican opposed. , and contributed to this report.

Wall Street Journal
13 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Trump Wants to Expand Nuclear Power. It Won't Be Easy.
President Trump wants the U.S. power industry to go nuclear. His recent executive orders aim to quadruple nuclear-power generation in the next 25 years—a monumental target. For most of the past three decades, the industry has been managing ever-older assets instead of building new reactors. Developers are counting on a supply-chain revival and will have to prove they can deliver on time and on budget to drive interest in the sector.


USA Today
18 minutes ago
- USA Today
Jeffries uses ‘magic minute' as part of resistance plan against Trump tax bill
On the eve of America's 250th birthday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, is doing all he can to delay what looks to be the inevitable passage of President Donald Trump's sweeping tax and domestic policy bill. Jeffries, stymied with legislative options to block Trump's signature "big beautiful bill", has now taken his efforts to the court of public opinion, seizing the microphone on the House floor in a marathon speech. The Democratic leader started his protest speech shortly before 5 a.m. on July 3 as House Republicans continue to hammer out the proposal that would extend the 2017 tax cuts, boost military and border security spending and make an estimated $1 trillion cut to Medicaid and other programs meant to help the poor and working-class. "I rise today in strong opposition to Donald Trump's disgusting abomination… that guts Medicaid, rips food from the mouths of children, seniors and veterans, and rewards billionaires with massive tax breaks," Jeffries said. There are stacks of binders next to Jeffries at the podium, which indicates he plans to extend this marathon debate further but the Trump administration and congressional Republicans believe they have enough votes to cross the finish line. Here are some key things to think about in the final hours of the bill's debate. Jeffries using 'magic minute' is part of Democratic resistance plan As the party out of power in every part of the federal government, Democrats don't have many options in terms of stopping Trump's bulldozer in Washington. Instead of defeating the bill, Jeffries appears to be looking to rally national outrage over Trump's measure -- which 55% of registered voters oppose, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released June 26 -- by using a procedural tactic known as the "magic minute" that gives the House leaders unlimited speaking time on the floor. "People will die," Jeffries said. "I'm sad. I never thought that I'd be on the House floor saying this is a crime scene. And House Democrats want no part of it." The marathon speech is similar to the one Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., did in April that lasted for 25 hours and 5 minutes and broke the Senate record. It is unclear if Jeffries' talk-a-thon is getting the same level of attention online as Booker's speech did, but he's using to it pick apart the mega-bill and other parts of Trump's agenda including the focus on illegal immigration. Jeffries said at one point that Democrats support fixing the country's "broken" immigration system and booting those who commit crimes out of the U.S., but that his party opposes targeting law-abiding immigrant families, such as a 2-year-old girl born to two undocumented immigrants in Florida who was deported to Brazil by the administration earlier this year. 'Take my sweet time': How long will Jeffries speak? Democrats aren't saying how long Jeffries plans to speak, but from the binders and other materials joining the 54-year-old congressman at the podium he appears to be ready to take up as much time as he can physically muster. "I'm still here to take my sweet time," Jeffries said at one point. The House Democratic leader is about halfway to breaking the all-time record for the longest House floor speech set by former Rep. Kevin McCarthy, who as the GOP leader in 2021 spoke against a Democratic spending measure. For much of this year Democrats and their progressive allies have been searching for different ways to regain voters' confidence and stop Trump's winning streak, whether by using congressional procedures or crashing press conferences held by administration officials. For most of the speech, Jeffries has been reading the testimonials of average Americans who will be impacted by spending cuts in what the president has dubbed his "one, big beautiful bill." But he has also been condemning other parts of the Trump agenda, including the massive effort to remove undocumented immigrants from the country. Vance scoffs at delay tactic as White House reschedules signing ceremony Republicans don't seem too deterred by Jeffries' protest speech, even as the White House is reportedly having to change plans on what day and time Trump will hold a ceremonial signing of the mega-bill. Vice President JD Vance took to X, formerly known as Twitter, suggesting the Democratic leader's speech is having the opposite effect. "GOP Congressman just texted me: 'I was undecided on the bill but then I watched Hakeem Jeffries performance and now I'm a firm yes.'" Other White House aides are mocking the marathon speech, too. Dan Scavino, a longtime Trump adviser and deputy chief of staff, posted a portion of Jeffries talking about stripping parts of the Affordable Care Act featuring the president playing an off-tune version of "My Heart Will Go On" on a flute. Contributing: Savannah Kuchar, Sudiksha Kochi and Joey Garrison