The Trump administration has leaned heavily on Title IX in its effort to purge sports of transgender women and girls, but attorneys and experts on the 1972 civil rights law say its latest move will disproportionately affect girls who are not transgender.<\/p>\n
The Department of Energy is preparing to roll back a portion of Title IX requiring that some sports be open to \u201cthe underrepresented sex,\u201d a cornerstone of the federal law against sex discrimination in schools that President Trump\u2019s administration has said conflicts with his executive order to restrict trans athletes\u2019 participation. <\/p>\n
The department plans to rescind a rule that has for decades allowed girls to try out for boys\u2019 sports teams or vice versa when there is no equivalent team at their school, with some exceptions for contact sports. The move would only affect schools and education programs that receive funding from the Energy Department. <\/p>\n
The department, which isn’t the primary agency to regulate or enforce Title IX, plans to rescind a rule that has for decades allowed girls to try out for boys\u2019 sports teams or vice versa when there is no equivalent female team at their school, with some exceptions for contact sports.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Women\u2019s Sports Foundation, a nonprofit organization founded by Billie Jean King, a foundational figure<\/a> in women\u2019s fight for parity in sports in the 1960s and 70s, said the Energy Department\u2019s proposal threatens to unravel years of progress and limit athletic opportunities for girls. <\/p>\n \u201cTo uphold the spirit and promise of Title IX, we urge for it to be withdrawn,\u201d the group said in an emailed statement to The Hill. <\/p>\n In justifying its proposal, announced last month<\/a>, the Energy Department said athletics rules allowing girls to compete on boys\u2019 teams \u201cignore differences between the sexes which are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality,\u201d language from Trump\u2019s day one executive order<\/a> proclaiming the federal government recognizes only two sexes, male and female. <\/p>\n Rescinding the regulation, the department said, aligns with another Trump order<\/a> declaring the U.S. opposes \u201cmale competitive participation in women\u2019s sports\u201d as a matter of \u201csafety, fairness, dignity and truth.\u201d <\/p>\n The Education Department, which historically has primarily enforced Title IX,\u00a0has launched more than two dozen\u00a0investigations this year into states, school districts and sports associations that allow trans girls to compete against and alongside girls who are not transgender. In announcing that the department would recognize June, which is traditionally Pride Month, as \u201cTitle IX Month,\u201d<\/a> Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the administration \u201cwill fight on every front to protect women\u2019s and girls\u2019 sports.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The changes the Department of Energy proposed would do little to further that objective, said James Nussbaum, an attorney focused on education and sports law at Church, Church, Hittle, and Antrim in Indiana. <\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m scratching my head for the motivation behind [rescinding the rule] because they mention the \u2018Keeping Men Out of Women\u2019s Sports\u2019 executive order, but it won\u2019t really apply in the vast majority of those cases because [the rule] only allows a person to participate in a sport of the other sex on two conditions,\u201d Nussbaum said. \u201cOne, the school doesn\u2019t already offer that sport for their sex, and two, they\u2019re the \u2018underrepresented sex\u2019 historically, and that\u2019s just not male sports at the vast majority of schools.\u201d <\/p>\n While no high schools in the U.S. offer an all-girls tackle football team, for example, more than 4,000 girls played 11-person tackle football on boys’ teams for the 2023-2024 school year, according to the National Federation of State High Schools Association<\/a>. <\/p>\n An Energy Department spokesperson did not return a request for comment. <\/p>\n Government agencies looking to change federal regulations must typically do so through a lengthy administrative process beginning with advance notice of proposed rulemaking and a public comment period generally lasting 30-60 days. <\/p>\n The Energy Department\u2019s Title IX proposal, submitted as a \u201cdirect final rule\u201d (DFR), would skirt traditional regulatory channels, allowing it to take effect automatically on July 15 absent \u201csignificant adverse comments,\u201d the deadline for which to submit is Monday.\u00a0<\/p>\n DFRs are exempt from parts of the standard rulemaking process, with which federal agencies must comply under the Administrative Procedures Act. Agencies may use DFRs when addressing issues that are technical, uncontroversial or unlikely to elicit a significant adverse response. <\/p>\n \u201cNone of that applies in this situation,\u201d said Shiwali Patel, senior director of safe and inclusive schools at the National Women\u2019s Law Center. \u201cThese are regulations that are long-standing, that have existed for decades.\u201d <\/p>\n That the athletics proposal originated in the Department of Energy rather than the Department of Education, whose Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is typically responsible for regulating and enforcing Title IX, is unusual, legal experts said. <\/p>\n Other agencies providing federal financial assistance to educational institutions also bear some enforcement responsibility, and under the Trump administration, the Health and Human Services and Justice departments have moved to carry out the law. In April, the departments of Justice and Education launched a joint special investigations task force<\/a> to streamline the government\u2019s handling of Title IX inquiries, citing ballooning caseloads. <\/p>\n \u201cGenerally, things have followed kind of a principle of logic \u2014 you stick to the things you\u2019re experts in, you regulate the things that you are tasked with regulating,\u201d said Maha Ibrahim, program managing attorney for Equal Rights Advocates, a nonprofit gender justice and women\u2019s rights organization.<\/p>\n In the past, she said, federal agencies such as the Energy Department might propose updating their Title IX regulations to mirror those issued by the Education Department to ensure cross-agency consistency, but they don\u2019t usually \u201cstep out of their lane and do the initial regulatory change.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis is unusual in an alarming way,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n The Department of Energy, with a larger budget and greater resources to conduct investigations, was perhaps the better choice to introduce the proposal over the Education Department, which Trump has sought to close<\/a><\/u>, Ibrahim said. In March, the agency shuttered seven of its 12 civil rights enforcement offices and fired hundreds of workers, K-12 Dive reported<\/a><\/u>. <\/p>\n Through its Renew America’s Schools Program, the Energy Department has invested $372.5 million in K-12 public school districts nationwide. The department also provides over $3.5 billion annually through grant programs to more than 300 colleges and universities.<\/p>\n While the Energy Department\u2019s proposal would only directly affect schools that receive its funding, the plan would create inconsistencies among federal agencies with Title IX regulations, confusing schools and potentially hampering students\u2019 and educators\u2019 ability to file claims, said Patel, of the National Women\u2019s Law Center.<\/p>\n The organization, which advocates for women\u2019s and LGBTQ rights, plans to submit a comment opposing the rule change, she said. More than 1,800 comments have already been submitted, but their content is not publicly available.<\/p>\n