Connect with us

National

Major athletic leagues absent in fight against anti-trans sports bills

Transgender rights advocates want response from NCAA

Published

on

Major sports leagues, such as the NCAA, have yet to speak out against anti-trans sports laws.

As state legislatures advance measures seeking to bar transgender kids from participating in school sports, key voices in athletics competition who had previously spoken out against anti-LGBTQ measures — notably the NCAA — are now absent from the fight against them, as supporters of transgender rights tell the Washington Blade they’re seeking a more robust response.

Major sports leagues at the professional level and collegiate level — including the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the National Basketball Association and the National Football League — in 2016 spoke out against North Carolina’s House Bill 2 and even threatened to cancel events in the state over the anti-transgender law. The voices of those sports leagues, however, are absent or muted in efforts to thwart anti-transgender sports bills as state legislatures advance them now with impunity.

Athletic organizations would be powerful voices in thwarting the anti-trans sports bills, including in Mississippi and North Carolina, where legislation won final approval in the state legislatures and are headed to the governors of those states.

Gail Dent, an NCAA spokesperson, essentially had a hands-off approach to the anti-transgender bills in response to a Washington Blade inquiry on the NCAA’s position on the legislation and what it’s doing to help in the fight against the legislation.

“The NCAA continues to closely monitor state bills that impact transgender student-athlete participation,” Dent said. “The NCAA believes in fair and respectful student-athlete participation at all levels of sport. The Association’s transgender student-athlete participation policy and other diversity policies are designed to facilitate and support inclusion. The NCAA believes diversity and inclusion improve the learning environment and it encourages its member colleges and universities to support the well-being of all student-athletes.”

That’s a step back from where the NCAA was just last year in response to Idaho’s then newly enacted law barring transgender girls from school sports. At the time, the association explicitly condemned the law as “harmful to transgender student-athletes and conflicts with the NCAA’s core values of inclusivity, respect and the equitable treatment of all individuals.”

But at the same time, amid a campaign spearheaded by lesbian athletes Billie Jean King and Megan Rapinoe urging the NCAA to nix holding the 2021 Men’s Basketball Championship in the state over the law, the NCAA announced no changes to its programming. The NCAA as of now still intends to hold the first and second rounds of the championship at Boise State University next week.

Transgender rights advocates, speaking on condition of anonymity to the Blade for greater candor, said they’ve been pushing hard behind the scenes for the NCAA to be more outspoken on the anti-transgender sports bills, and hope the association will have a more robust response in the near future.

NCAA, however, isn’t alone in its reticence. The NFL and NBA didn’t respond to repeated requests from the Blade to comment on the anti-transgender sports bills in state legislatures.

The reluctance to speak out may be a reflection of polls. A Politico/Morning Consult poll on Wednesday found broad support to ban transgender kids from athletics. Overall, 53 percent of registered voters support banning transgender athletes, as well as a 59 percent majority of men and a plurality of 46 percent of women.

Cathryn Oakley, state legislative director and senior counsel for the Human Rights Campaign, said although the NCAA hasn’t spoken out against the latest wave of anti-transgender sports bills, its statement against the Idaho law has been helpful in efforts against the latest round of measures.

“The NCAA opposed the bill that passed in Idaho last year; they issued a statement with their opposition to that bill,” Oakley said. “And that is something that certainly we have been making sure that all of these legislators who are considering this legislation are aware of.”

Five years ago, the situation was different. Massive opposition emerged over North Carolina’s House Bill 2, which barred transgender people from bathrooms in government-owned buildings consistent with their gender identity, including opposition from sports leagues, professional associations, celebrities, businesses and a firestorm of media scrutiny. The outcry echoed similar outrage over proposed religious freedom measures in Arizona in 2013 and Indiana in 2015 seen to allow businesses to refuse to service to people for being LGBTQ.

In addition to speaking out against the law, sports leagues put their money where their mouth is. NBA Commissioner Adam Silver informed North Carolina “it would be problematic for us to move forward with our All-Star Game if there is not a change in the law.” When no changes were made, the competition was pulled out of Charlotte.

The NCAA stripped North Carolina of seven upcoming tournaments and championships, including early round games of the 2017 NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Tournament. The Atlantic Coast Conference and the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association also cancelled events in the state.

The collective outcry over House Bill 2 helped lead to the defeat of Gov. Pat McCrory in the 2016 election and eventual mitigation law seen to permit transgender people to use the bathroom consistent with their gender identity. In 2021, however, bills signaling transgender youth should be excluded from sports athletics are on the verge of being signed into law in South Dakota by Gov. Kristi Noem, who has 2024 presidential aspirations, and in Mississippi by Gov. Tate Reeves.

Oakley pointed out a key difference between between North Carolina’s House Bill 2 and legislation pending before state legislatures and governors is the newer measures “are not signed into law yet.”

“While it’s unfortunate, it is true that we have been much more able to generate public outcry — or that public outcry is easier to come by — after the bills have already been signed into law,” Oakley said. “Both North Carolina and Indiana are examples of that, right? So, HB 2 had passed first before the backlash began, and that backlash took weeks to mount and to really get to the point of what we think of now as being the sort of universal rejection of HB 2. That was not instantaneous.”

Defenders of efforts to combat the anti-transgender legislation say they have plenty of ammunition. Last week, the LGBTQ group Freedom for All Americans unveiled a joint statement signed by more than 55 major companies, including Facebook, Pfizer, and Dell, against the latest wave of anti-LGBTQ state legislation, including bills targeting transgender youth.

Oakley added other organizations have issued statements contributing to the fight against state bills, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Association of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, teachers and school counselors associations.

“It’s really great when we can have a group of professionals who are experts in the issues, who are willing to speak out against these bills in the beginning, but for some of these really big bills that are really big threats, it does take time to generate enough pressure that the legislators have to reconsider their choices,” Oakley said.

Other states have advanced or considered similar measures, including Alabama. More than 60 bills have been filed in 30 states to directly target transgender people, including 20 bills specifically aimed at transgender kids in sports. The Utah House last month approved an anti-transgender sports bill, but the measure stalled out in Senate committee.

Even the U.S. Senate has contributed to the measures against transgender youth in sports. Prior to Senate approval of President Biden’s coronavirus relief package, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) proposed an amendment that would have defunded schools and universities that allow biological boys in women’s athletics, essentially barring transgender girls. The measure was defeated in a 49-50 vote requiring 60 votes for passage, but won support from senators on both sides of the aisle, including Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine).

To be sure, not all the measures targeting LGBTQ people in state legislatures are related to sports. The Alabama Senate has passed legislation now pending before the House that would criminalize transition-related care with a punishment of up to 10 years in prison for doctors. The South Dakota Legislature has sent legislation to the governor’s desk mirroring the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act critics say amounts to a religious refusal for LGBTQ people to the governor’s desk. The Montana Senate has passed bills inhibiting the ability of transgender people to change their gender marker on birth certificates and a religious freedom bill, which are now pending before the House.

Joanna Hoffman, a spokesperson for the LGBTQ group Athlete Ally, made a plea for state legislatures to abandon efforts to restrict transgender kids’ access to sports when asked by the Blade about any efforts to reach out to sport organizations to condemn the proposals.

“Transgender girls and women never have been a threat to girls and women’s sports,” Hoffmam said. “In fact, in states where transgender athletes are able to compete, participation is stronger for all girls. Every person deserves to have their life changed for the better through sports, and we need voices in power to join us in speaking out for sports to truly be safe, welcoming and inclusive for all.” 

Athlete Ally announced Wednesday that at least 545 National Collegiate Athletic Association student athletes sent a letter to the NCAA Board of Governors calling for the NCAA to uphold its nondiscrimination policy and publicly refuse to host championships in states with bans against trans athletes.

TERFs newly energized in pushing for transgender exclusion

Meanwhile, groups opposing transgender non-discrimination in the name of women’s rights, which critics are calling “TERFs” or trans-exclusionary radical feminists, appear to be finding new energy — both at the grassroots and grass tops levels — in supporting anti-trans bills and opposition to the Equality Act, legislation before Congress that would expand the prohibition on anti-LGBTQ discrimination under federal law.

At the same time as athletic groups are reluctant to speak out against the bills, athletes like Martina Navratilova, booted from Athlete Ally for opposing transgender girls, are calling for an exemption under Biden’s executive order for women’s sports.

Among them is Women’s Human Rights Campaign, which appears to draw its name as a parody on the nation’s leading LGBTQ group, and held a march in Washington, D.C. on Monday against the executive order Biden signed against anti-LGBTQ discrimination on the first day of his presidency.

Handling pool duty for the White House press corps on Monday, the Blade witnessed around two-dozen protesters near the Washington Monument holding up signs against the Equality Act and shouting an indiscernible chant as Biden’s motorcade passed that day en route to a VA medical center. The protesters remained near the White House upon Biden’s return trip. One held up a sign reading, “The Equality Act makes women second-class citizens.”

The efforts appear to be part of a coordinated campaign by Republicans to make inroads with suburban women, as reported by Politico, by stoking fears about transgender rights. The loss of support from suburban women is widely seen as playing a key role in Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election after having contributed to his win in 2016.

Oakley said the rise of groups that oppose transgender inclusion in the name of LGBTQ rights are evidence of an “unholy alliance” between women and conservative groups that oppose LGBTQ rights, such as Alliance Defending Freedom and The Heritage Foundation.

“I do think that they are joining forces, and I think that has to do with them having at this point a common purpose, which is excluding, harming and scapegoating trans people for many of the real issues that face women,” Oakley said.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

HRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey

Organization cites rise in homophobic, transphobic policies, worse mental health outcomes

Published

on

Department of Education. (Public domain photo)

The Human Rights Campaign is slamming the White House — and the Department of Education — following their removal of some LGBTQ bullying data from federal data collection.

The Civil Rights Data Collection is a mandated survey of all public school districts that collects figures on a wide variety of statistics about students — including demographics that include race, ethnicity, sex, disability status, and English learner status; course-level enrollment data, such as how many students are enrolled in advanced placement or honors classes; and school climate information, such as rates of bullying, harassment, suspensions, and expulsions.

That data collection has been ongoing since 1968 — nearly six decades — but now has a major change in what questions are being asked, or not asked, that advocates are largely attributing to the Trump-Vance administration’s culture war fight on LGBTQ children in the country.

Changes to the 2025-2026 survey questions — approved by the Office of Budget and Management in July — eliminated a space for schools to report how many students identify as nonbinary, how often those students are victims of harassment and bullying, and whether school districts have policies prohibiting gender identity-based incidents.

K-12 Dive, a publication that focuses its reporting on news related to K-12 education, first published a list of these data collection changes from 2024-2025 to 2025-2026.

These questions, as well as others that included LGBTQ student topics on treatment in schools, were added to the CRDC under the Biden-Harris administration. By including these questions, policymakers hoped this would lead to increased investigations into discrimination complaints, initiate compliance reviews, and provide policy guidance to districts, according to Education Department documents.

The CRDC also eliminated the mention of “gender identity” from the definition of rape and sexual assault. The prior collection of data (before the Trump-Vance administration changed it) defined rape as something that could be done to “all students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation, or gender identity.” Now, the new data collection questions say, “All students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation can be victims of rape,” removing “gender identity” from the new definition.

By removing and changing definitions, this could have a real-world impact on some of the school’s most vulnerable students. According to CRDC data from 2021-2022, more than 1,800 school districts reported enrolling one or more nonbinary students.

Additional data also shows that the changes to data collection is harming public school students. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee released a report in April finding that the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to all but close the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights has left students facing discrimination and harassment throughout the country without the federal recourse they are entitled to under federal law.

The Williams Institute, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, has data indicating the true number of nonbinary and transgender children is much higher — they estimate that for children ages 13 to 17, nearly 724,000 identify as nonbinary or trans.

This is in line with a slew of policies pushed by the Trump-Vance administration since their federal takeover. Within his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” This directive attempts to make the federal definition of gender unchangeable, determined by sex assigned at birth alone.

Within his first month of his second term, Trump issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.

He also pushed multiple anti-trans executive orders, including Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” and Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” targeting trans athletes and military members, respectively.

These policies have a real-world impact on trans people.

The Trevor Project, a nonprofit dedicated to crisis and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people under 25, reported that, for the seventh year in a row, LGBTQ youth are at higher risk for suicide as a result of mistreatment and stigmatization.

Trevor Project data showed that nearly 60 percent of LGBTQ young people ages 13-17 said they were bullied in the past year, and that 36 percent of LGBTQ youth seriously considered suicide in the last year. The data shows a bigger discrepancy for trans youth, with that number hovering around 40 percent considering suicide.

HRC President Kelley Robinson issued a statement following the approval of the new data collection questions that leaves LGBTQ students’ bullying statistics under — if not completely unreported.

“If there was even a shadow of a doubt, this latest move by the Trump administration makes it abundantly clear they do not care about the safety of LGBTQ+ students, and trans students in particular,” Robinson said. “These are adults who should be protecting our kids. And instead, they are making sure bullying and harassment are not tracked. If they are not tracked, bullying and harassment cannot be prevented or stopped — which is exactly what the Trump administration wants. Parents deserve to know their kids are safe at school, and every single young person deserves dignity and safety at school. Anything less is plain evil.”

HRC has a “Welcoming Schools” initiative that they say is the “most comprehensive” bias-based bullying prevention program in the nation. The program includes LGBTQ and gender-inclusive resources for schools, help navigating special education and disability resources for LGBTQ-identifying students, and other tools to help schools become more inclusive.

This program has been in effect for nearly two decades and, according to HRC, reaches nearly 750,000 students.

The Washington Blade reached out to both the Department of Education and Office of Management and Budget for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

Continue Reading

Michigan

Progressives score victory as El-Sayed wins Mich. Senate primary

Democratic newcomer will face Rogers in November

Published

on

Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed (Screen capture via MS NOW/YouTube)

Michigan held its primary on Tuesday, allowing the two major political parties to select their nominees to go head-to-head for the state’s U.S. Senate seat.

NBC News called the Democratic race early, giving the victory to physician Abdul El-Sayed over incumbent U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in an extremely close primary. El-Sayed won 48.5 percent of the primary vote, with Stevens trailing by just one percentage point at 47.5 percent.

Both candidates have campagined on supporting the LGBTQ community through different avenues— for El-Sayed he focused on his past promoting HIV and PrEP funding and research. Stevens focused on her legislative history working to support transgender rights in the state.

This is a major win for progressive Democrats, who have been bearing the brunt of political attacks from President Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and centrist Democrats.

El-Sayed, a former health director in Detroit, ran his campaign largely on making life in the Great Lakes State more affordable amid rising costs. His policies include promoting “Medicare for All,” pushing health policy that targets the regressive efforts of the Trump-Vance administration that rolls back funding for both Women and LGBTQ people, minimizing the growing amount of money in politics, and he was very vocal in his criticism of Stevens for supporting aid to Israel. He was endorsed by two major progressives — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.).

Stevens, the four-term congresswoman, is much closer to establishment Democrats on policy than El-Sayed.

During her time in the federal government, she has consistently supported the Equality Act, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She has also emphasized supporting local manufacturing and lowering housing costs in the state.

She was named to Advocates for Trans Equality’s 118th Congressional Champions list for her pro-trans policies and was endorsed by establishment heavy hitters Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

The contentious race boiled down not only to Michigan affairs but also extended to international conflicts — namely Palestine. (South Africa has filed a case in the International Court of Justice in The Hague that accuses Israel of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip after Oct. 7.) This primary also acted as one of the first major races that pushed back against AIPAC, a lobbying group that works to promote pro-Israel candidates in U.S. elections. The group has been involved in domestic politics since 1954.

AIPAC devoted a massive amount of money to this race.

The Associated Press reported that the pro-Israel lobbying group spent more than $30 million on ads against El-Sayed because of his vocal denunciation of Israel and his continued criticism of its policies towards Palestine.

Michigan has a large Muslim and Arab American population, which could, in part, explain how El-Sayed was able to win.

The Republican side was far less competitive. Former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) ran unopposed and clinched the GOP nomination. He has consistently held anti-LGBTQ positions, going as far as voting multiple times for a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, voting against repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and supporting efforts to directly target the attempted expansion of Title IX protections to include trans people.

El-Sayed will face off against Rogers in November for Michigan’s Senate seat — one that could have lasting impacts not only on the state’s politics but also on the Republicans’ narrow Senate majority and Trump’s political agenda.

Continue Reading

National

White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits

Administration criticizes National Museum of American History

Published

on

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum is expected to install warning signs outside the National Museum of American History warning visitors of supposedly anti-American content. (Photo courtesy of the Office of the Governor of North Dakota)

The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.

According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”

Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.

Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.

“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.

The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.

The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.

The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”

The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.

It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”

Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”

On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.

In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.

House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”

In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.

Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.

“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.

Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.

It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.

An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)

Continue Reading

Popular