Trump admin to investigate California schools after district declares it will still allow males on female sports teams



The Department of Education under President Donald Trump announced it has launched investigations into multiple high school athletic associations that said they would defy federal discrimination laws.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights announced yet another round of Title IX-related investigations, citing possible infractions for "allowing male athletes to compete in women’s sports and use women’s intimate facilities."

The California Interscholastic Federation, which is now under investigation, recently told Fox News that it plans on continuing its compliance with state rules, not federal, and will allow athletes to compete in whichever gender category they wish.

"The CIF provides students with the opportunity to belong, connect, and compete in education-based experiences in compliance with California law [Education Code section 221.5. (f)] which permits students to participate in school programs and activities, including athletic teams and competitions, consistent with the student's gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the student's records," the district said in a statement.

'Students in Minnesota are allowed to participate consistent with their gender identity.'

At the same time, the Minnesota State High School League, which is also now under investigation, said the eligibility of transgender athletes is determined by state law and the Minnesota Human Rights Act.

Fox 9 reported that in a letter to schools, the district declared, "Participation and eligibility of transgender student-athletes ... similar to other youth sports organizations, is subject to state anti-discrimination laws, which prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. Therefore, students in Minnesota are allowed to participate consistent with their gender identity."

Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights, said the districts "must abide by federal law."

He added, "I would remind these organizations that history does not look kindly on entities and states that actively opposed the enforcement of federal civil rights laws that protect women and girls from discrimination and harassment."

Trump's executive order, titled Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports, stated the federal government would "rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities."

The Department of Education has since opened other investigations into high school districts and even investigations into college athletic programs at San Jose State University and the University of Pennsylvania. Both universities have allegedly forced their female athletes to compete with and share locker rooms with male athletes.

The government agency said there were "suspected Title IX" violations in the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association as well, which included male field hockey and basketball players competing with, and injuring, young girls.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

NCAA must restore women's records, titles, and awards that were taken by men, Department of Education declares



The Department of Education sent a letter to the NCAA demanding any records or awards taken by males in female categories be returned to their rightful holders.

President Trump signed an executive order on February 5 aimed at preventing men from competing in women's sports. The order called for "enforcement actions against educational institutions" if they force women to participate in sports or athletic events with men or if they are forced to change in front of them.

The DOE has since penned a letter to NCAA president Charlie Baker and Bob Lombardi, president of the National Federation of State High School Associations, meaning that both colleges and high schools were instructed to take action on the "Restoration of Women's Athletics Records, Titles, Awards and Recognitions."

The letter explained that both the NCAA and NFHS must restore any of the records or awards, etc., that were "wrongfully credited to male athletes."

'Men will no longer be allowed to compete in women’s sports regardless of how they identify.'

The DOE cited a clear, national standard from the recent executive order that demanded the NCAA make the necessary steps to align its policy with the federal government, which was described as protecting women from gender ideology extremism while restoring "biological truth."

This included removing "glaring loopholes" that allow males to compete against females moving forward. As well, the DOE asked the governing bodies to act immediately to "rectify the injustices" that female athletes have faced across the nation.

"Because of President Trump’s bold leadership, men will no longer be allowed to compete in women’s sports regardless of how they identify, and the NCAA has correctly changed its tune on its discriminatory practices against female athletes," Candice Jackson, deputy general counsel for the DOE, said in a press release.

Jackson added, "The next necessary step is to restore athletic records to women who have for years been devalued, ignored, and forced to watch men steal their accolades. The Trump Education Department will do everything in our power to right this wrong and champion the hard-earned accomplishments of past, current, and future female collegiate athletes.”

The government also cited former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines, who was among the first to speak out after being forced to compete against a man in the women's 200-meter NCAA championships.

Gaines posted a page from the letter on her X account, calling it "a critical step in accountability and responsibility."

She also praised President Trump for recognizing and celebrating women's accomplishments and called the restoration of records and awards a move toward common sense.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Kamala 2.0? Buttigieg Made Same Pledge To Support Taxpayer-Funded Transgender Surgeries for Criminals That Dogged Harris Campaign.

It wasn’t just Kamala Harris. No, during the 2020 Democratic primary, presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg also supported taxpayer-funded gender transition surgeries for federal inmates and illegal immigrants.

The post Kamala 2.0? Buttigieg Made Same Pledge To Support Taxpayer-Funded Transgender Surgeries for Criminals That Dogged Harris Campaign. appeared first on .

The ‘conservative’ 5th Circuit just shielded Biden’s radical gender agenda



How does Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination, justify forcing doctors to violate the Hippocratic Oath and perform castrations to accommodate transgender ideology? No rational legal mind could reach that conclusion.

Yet the judiciary has become so politically compromised that even the supposedly conservative Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an interpretation of the law that forces doctors to perform these procedures — or risk losing Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements.

If doctors must wait until they are punished to challenge a rule, why don’t Trump’s directives get the same deference? What happened to legal consistency?

As part of the Biden administration’s relentless effort to impose transgender ideology nationwide, the president issued an order last year interpreting Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act as a mandate for doctors to perform irreversible castrations. Originally designed to prohibit sex-based discrimination under the 1972 law, Section 1557 has now been twisted into the prior administration’s legal justification for these procedures.

Yes, the deeply flawed Bostock v. Clayton County decision — thanks to Justice Neil Gorsuch — expanded the 1972 law to include protections for transgender individuals. But on what basis does an anti-discrimination law create a right to force doctors to perform procedures they believe cause harm?

Bostock involved an employee fired for cross-dressing at work. Biden’s order, by contrast, does not merely prohibit discrimination — it compels employers to provide not just dresses but irreversible medical procedures.

Questions of standing — and bad precedent

For any Republican-appointed judge, this should have been an easy decision. In 2022, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee in the Northern District of Texas, ruled in favor of the physician plaintiffs. He issued a declaratory judgment stating that the administration had completely misinterpreted the Affordable Care Act’s anti-discrimination provision. He also affirmed that physicians had clear standing to sue over the order.

In December, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit, including two Republican appointees, ruled that doctors lacked standing to sue the Biden administration.

“The plaintiffs do not consider their actions to be gender-identity discrimination, nor do they provide evidence that HHS would view them as such,” the court stated.

“Plaintiffs have failed to show they are actually violating the Notification, much less facing a credible threat of enforcement," Judges Edith Jones, Catharina Haynes, and Dana Douglas wrote in their per curiam opinion.

Last week, despite a 12-5 Republican-appointed majority, all but one judge — James Ho — refused to hear the case en banc, allowing this precedent to stand.

This case highlights how judges selectively apply standing based on political considerations. The left rarely struggles with standing. During Trump’s presidency, his executive orders faced immediate legal challenges, and liberal judges routinely granted standing.

For instance, blue states successfully sued over Trump’s order on anchor-baby citizenship, yet red states were repeatedly denied standing to challenge Biden’s immigration law violations.

The inconsistency is blatant. Doctors facing potential loss of Medicaid reimbursements supposedly do not have a “justiciable case,” but Trump’s executive orders were routinely enjoined before they even took effect.

The idea that doctors cannot sue over a regulation that threatens their Medicaid reimbursements until after they suffer consequences defies legal precedent.

A terrible double standard

Meanwhile, Trump’s executive orders have been blocked before even appearing in the federal register. How can courts enjoin a presidential directive before it becomes an official regulation?

If doctors must wait until they are punished to challenge a rule, why don’t Trump’s directives get the same deference? What happened to legal consistency?

The idea that doctors who have not yet faced punishment but could lose Medicaid reimbursements for refusing to perform castrations lack a ripe, justiciable claim is absurd given what happens in the courts daily.

I’m all for a minimalist judicial approach, but why does that never apply to those suing Republican presidents? Indeed, the courts have become a one-way ratchet for the left.

In a spirited dissent from his 16 colleagues — something he has grown accustomed to — Judge Ho argued that refusing to provide sex hormone therapy is not the same as categorical discrimination. A doctor who declines to prescribe hormones for gender dysphoria is not refusing to treat a transgender patient for a broken bone.

The Supreme Court already ruled in Geduldig v. Aiello (1974) that denying coverage for pregnancy does not constitute sex-based discrimination. “While it is true that only women can become pregnant, it does not follow that every legislative classification concerning pregnancy is a sex-based classification,” the justices ruled.

On the question of standing, Judge Ho criticized the majority for basing its argument on the notion that a podiatrist wouldn’t offer “transition” services anyway, so not every doctor should have standing to sue. He called this absurd, pointing out that Dr. Susan Neese, the plaintiff in this case, practices general internal medicine.

“She is fully capable of providing such services to minors,” Ho wrote. “She just thinks it’s wrong to do so.”

“If there’s a plausible basis for theorizing that it’s somehow outside of Dr. Neese’s specialty to simply make a referral of a minor patient to another doctor who specializes in the field, the United States has not offered one,” he concluded.

Trump is likely to overturn this policy anyway, but as Ho warned, the Fifth Circuit’s decision allows a bad precedent to remain in place for future cases.

“By denying rehearing en banc, our court today leaves on the books a published, precedential ruling that overturns the district court’s dutiful efforts and validates administrative overreach in an area of profound sensitivity,” he wrote in a footnote.

One can only speculate, but given the left-wing political attacks on the Fifth Circuit, some worry that the judges are softening their stance to avoid appearing too conservative. Whether that’s better or worse than siding with the ideological left outright is debatable. Either way, Trump should make a point of appointing more judges like James Ho in his second term — jurists who not only hold sound legal principles but also have the courage to rule accordingly.

California Attorney General Accuses Children’s Hospital of Discrimination for Pausing Sex-Change Drugs for Kids

California attorney general Rob Bonta accused Children’s Hospital Los Angeles of illegal discrimination over its decision to halt sex-changes for kids—a necessary move to protect its bottom line after President Donald Trump issued an executive order barring federal funds from going to hospitals that provide such interventions.

The post California Attorney General Accuses Children’s Hospital of Discrimination for Pausing Sex-Change Drugs for Kids appeared first on .

NCAA swimmers say they were told they may have 'psychological' problems if they had issues with Lia Thomas



Three former NCAA swimmers from the University of Pennsylvania are suing the governing body over what they said was a violation of Title IX and repeated emotional trauma.

The swimmers, Grace Estabrook, Margot Kaczorowski, and Ellen Holmquist filed a lawsuit against UPenn, Harvard, the NCAA, and the Ivy League Council of Presidents over having to share a team locker room with Lia Thomas, an allegedly transgender swimmer.

Thomas was not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, Fox News reported, but the women still claimed that UPenn violated their Title IX rights and was engaged in discrimination by allowing Thomas to compete with and against women.

The lawsuit also showed the women claimed the institutions "injured them and violated federal law," while their experiences sharing changing rooms with Thomas left them "repeatedly emotionally traumatized."

Furthermore, the former swimmers said that when they brought up their issues with their administrators, they were led to believe their concerns were rooted in a "psychological problem."

Moreover, the women said pro-trans ideology was pushed on them throughout the duration of Thomas being in their locker room.

The lawsuit claimed, "UPenn administrators told the women that if anyone was struggling with accepting Thomas’ participation on the UPenn Women’s team, they should seek counseling and support from CAPS and the LBGTQ center."

None of the governing bodies responded to inquiries from Fox News.

The news came as President Trump signed an executive order to prevent men from competing in women's sports. The order called for "enforcement actions against educational institutions" if they force women to participate in sports or athletic events with men, or if they are forced to "appear unclothed before males."

Violators would be investigated and possibly have their federal funding stripped.

— (@)

The same day, NCAA President Charlie Baker announced the sporting body would align itself with the new policy.

"We strongly believe that clear, consistent, and uniform eligibility standards would best serve today's student-athletes instead of a patchwork of conflicting state laws and court decisions. To that end, President Trump's order provides a clear, national standard," a press release stated.

The statement continued, "The NCAA Board of Governors is reviewing the executive order and will take necessary steps to align NCAA policy in the coming days, subject to further guidance from the administration. The Association will continue to help foster welcoming environments on campuses for all student-athletes. We stand ready to assist schools as they look for ways to support any student-athletes affected by changes in the policy."

— (@)

Baker was grilled by Republican senators two months prior, with the NCAA boss responding that his policies "give people optionality with how they choose to use their facilities."

Baker referred to a "federal standard" as the reason why no NCAA policy had been made in regards to transgender athletes but said he was willing to "work with" the government to develop one.

At the time, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said the NCAA should focus on bigger issues:

"510,000 NCAA athletes. 10 or fewer transgender NCAA athletes nationwide. Let's focus on ways to actually improve women's sports," the senator wrote.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump Signs Executive Order Banning Biological Men in Women's Sports

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order that prohibits biologically male athletes from participating in women's sports, delivering on a campaign promise.

The post Trump Signs Executive Order Banning Biological Men in Women's Sports appeared first on .

ESPN Gets Dragged For Temper Tantrum After Trump Bans Men From Ruining Women’s Sports

The woke-scolds running ESPN threw a temper tantrum on Wednesday over President Trump’s efforts to keep men out of women’s sports — and boy, oh boy, did it not end well for them. While “reporting” on the president’s executive order designed to restore fairness in sports by preventing trans-identifying males from competing against female athletes, […]

After Trump EO, Hospitals Push Gender Dysphoria While Claiming No Trans Surgeries On Kids

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-04-at-11.18.48 AM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-04-at-11.18.48%5Cu202fAM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]When it comes to protecting children from the dangers of radical gender ideology including mutilation and sterilization, enforcement is key.

If Leftists Believe DEI Radicalism Is So Popular, Why Are They Whitewashing Their Support For It?

It only took a shellacking at the ballot box, but some leftists seem to be slowly realizing that their harmful race and gender politics aren’t selling with voters as much as they’d hoped. Last week, it was reported that former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg axed his “he/him” pronouns from his social media accounts. The discovery […]