Maryland GovPics // Wikimedia Commons
Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Education issued sweeping threats and launched investigations into 18 school districts across the United States for allowing transgender girls to participate in girls’ sports. The actions appear to be a continuation of the administration’s long-running pressure campaign against districts with transgender-inclusive policies—most of which have refused to comply and, in many cases, have successfully fought back. Notably, the latest wave of investigations coincided with historic Supreme Court oral arguments on transgender sports participation held the same day, signaling that the administration may believe a ruling favoring discrimination is imminent and is preparing to force compliance even in blue states with longstanding protections for transgender students. In response, multiple school districts are already declaring their intent to keep supporting their transgender students.
Among the school districts and institutions notified that they will be placed under investigation for transgender-inclusive policies are Jurupa Unified School District (CA), Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified School District (CA), Santa Monica College (CA), Santa Rosa Junior College (CA), Waterbury Public Schools (CT), the Hawaii State Department of Education (HI), Regional School Unit 19 (ME), Regional School Unit 57 (ME), Foxborough Public Schools (MA), University of Nevada, Reno (NV), Bellmore-Merrick Central High School District (NY), the New York City Department of Education (NY), Great Valley School District (PA), Champlain Valley School District (VT), Cheney Public Schools (WA), Sultan School District No. 311 (WA), Tacoma Public Schools (WA), and Vancouver Public Schools (WA).
The threats appeared to focus primarily on sports, though the administration’s past Title IX enforcement actions have also explicitly or implicitly sought to dictate policies governing dormitories and bathroom access. Notably, the investigations are concentrated largely in blue states with progressive policies and, in many cases, shield laws protecting transgender rights, asserting that it can override those protections. This approach rests on a novel and fringe legal theory advanced by the Trump administration: that Title IX not only permits discrimination, but requires it. Under this theory, the administration has repeatedly attempted to withhold significant federal funding from school districts that allow transgender girls to participate in youth sports or use bathrooms aligned with their gender—funds that often support programs such as free and reduced-price lunch for hungry students and after-school services.
“In the same week that the Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the future of Title IX, OCR is aggressively pursuing allegations of discrimination against women and girls by entities which reportedly allow males to compete in women’s sports. Time and again, the Trump Administration has made its position clear: violations of women’s rights, dignity, and fairness are unacceptable,” said Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey in a press release for the Department of Education. “We will leave no stone unturned in these investigations to uphold women’s right to equal access in education programs—a fight that started over half a century ago and is far from finished.”
Schools are already beginning to formulate their responses, and so far, none appear to be immediately complying with demands to ban transgender athletes or impose bathroom restrictions in response to the letters. Instead, multiple districts are publicly reaffirming inclusive policies. In Vermont, Champlain Valley Superintendent Adam Bunting said in response to the letter, “No investigation is going to stop us from taking care of our kids… I want to assure you and all of our students that we remain steadfast in our commitment to honoring the identities of every learner.” At the University of Nevada-Reno, a spokesperson similarly pushed back, stating, “The University remains committed to fostering an inclusive, supportive, and respectful campus environment for all of our students. We also recognize and uphold our responsibilities under state and federal law, and we will continue to act in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.”
Many school districts have remained silent in the immediate aftermath of receiving the letter, likely working with legal counsel to determine their next steps. While multiple major universities and Ivy League institutions have, in the last year, broadly capitulated to anti-transgender pressure, local school districts have shown far greater reluctance to comply. Earlier this year, multiple districts rebuffed similar administration threats to withhold funding tied to school lunch programs and sex education, including school systems in Virginia, New York City, Denver, and Chicago—all of which refused to back down.
The threats arrive alongside a Supreme Court hearing on transgender participation in school sports. While the case itself is narrowly focused on athletics, its outcome could have sweeping consequences for transgender rights nationwide—shaping how Title IX is enforced in blue states and whether transgender people receive any constitutional protections tied to sex and gender identity at all. As the court deliberates, the fight is already playing out on the ground, with state and local officials bracing for continued federal pressure that seeks to strip funding from basic school programs, including lunch assistance for hungry children, in an effort to force discrimination against a small number of transgender students.
Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.
From Erin In The Morning via This RSS Feed.