By Tom Ozimek
Contributing Writer
The Department of Justice has launched a civil rights investigation into California’s enforcement of a state law that allows male students who identify as female to compete in girls’ sports, warning that the policy may violate Title IX protections against sex-based discrimination.
In a Wednesday statement, the DOJ announced it was opening a formal inquiry into whether California, along with its senior legal, educational and athletic organizations, is “engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on sex.”
At the heart of the probe is Assembly Bill 1266, a 2014 California law that permits students to participate in school sports in accordance with their gender identity.
The DOJ contends this policy may unlawfully allow males to displace females from podium finishes, scholarships and even team rosters — outcomes that DOJ officials argue run afoul of Title IX, the landmark federal civil rights law.
“Title IX exists to protect women and girls in education. It is perverse to allow males to compete against girls, invade their private spaces, and take their trophies,” Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights, said in the statement.
“This division will aggressively defend women’s hard-fought rights to equal educational opportunities.”
U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli added that his office and the rest of the DOJ “will work tirelessly to protect girls’ sports and stop anyone – public officials included – from violating women’s civil rights.”
As part of the investigation, the DOJ said it had sent a series of letters of legal notice to California state officials and organizations. In a letter to the California Interscholastic Federation, the DOJ said it had found reasonable cause to believe that the CIF, which oversees high school athletics across the state, is engaged in a pattern of discrimination against female athletes by enforcing policies that permit male students to compete in girls’ events.
The letter singled out CIF Bylaw 300.D, which instructs member schools to allow students to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity. DOJ officials argue that this directive effectively compels schools to allow male athletes into girls’ competitions, “thereby depriving girls and young women of equal athletic opportunities.”
As evidence, the DOJ cited a recent CIF-sanctioned track meet where a transgender athlete — identified in media reports as AB Hernandez — won the girls’ triple jump and long jump titles and qualified for the state finals in three events.
“California’s top-ranked girls’ triple jumper, and second-ranked long jumper, is a boy,” the DOJ letter stated, adding that female athletes have alleged they were similarly “robbed of podium positions and spots on their teams” after they were forced to compete against males.
President Donald Trump condemned Hernandez’s victories in a post on Truth Social, threatening to withhold federal funding from California if the state does not act.
“This week a transitioned male athlete, at a major event, won ‘everything,’ and is now qualified to compete in the ‘State Finals’ next weekend,” Trump wrote. “As a male, he was a less than average competitor. As a female, this transitioned person is practically unbeatable. This is not fair, and totally demeaning to women and girls.”
Trump warned that federal funding would be withheld, possibly permanently, if his presidential decree on the subject matter is not followed. The president was referring to a Feb. 5 executive order — titled Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports — which rescinds all federal funds from state educational programs that “deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, which results in the endangerment, humiliation and silencing of women and girls and deprives them of privacy.”
The CIF said in a Wednesday statement that it is adopting a temporary rule change that opens up its track-and-field championship to more girls after AB Hernandez’s win drew backlash.
Under the change, “any biological female student-athlete who would have earned the next qualifying mark for one of their section’s automatic qualifying entries in the CIF state meet, and did not achieve the CIF state at-large mark in the finals at their section meet” will be given an opportunity to participate in the upcoming state championship. Further, if a transgender athlete wins a medal in the high jump, triple jump and long jump competitions, their podium spot will not displace that of a “biological female.”
“The CIF values all of our student-athletes and we will continue to uphold our mission of providing students with the opportunity to belong, connect and compete while complying with California law and Education Code,” the federation added.
The DOJ’s investigation into AB 1266 follows a lawsuit filed earlier this year by a group of female high school athletes who say they were displaced by male competitors under the current CIF and state policies. The DOJ has filed a statement of interest in the case, siding with the plaintiffs and arguing that AB 1266 is incompatible with federal law.
“The presence of a biological male-transgender female competing on a girls’ cross-country team upsets the level playing field, interfering with the equal opportunity for females to fully participate in and enjoy the educational benefits of athletics,” reads the Wednesday filing in the case, which was brought by two girls cross-country athletes and their guardians, along with the Save Girls’ Sports organization.
The plaintiff students named in the suit are T.S., a junior cross-country runner and team captain at a California high school, and K.S., a ninth-grader at the same school. According to the lawsuit, T.S. lost her varsity team spot and missed key recruitment opportunities after a male athlete was allowed to compete in her place, despite reportedly failing to meet team eligibility standards.
Attorney Robert Tyler, who represents the plaintiff students, issued a statement calling on Trump and lawmakers in Congress to take action to “restore women’s sports and stop the mockery of women” by a “radical and ignorant ideology.”
