Fight over California’s trans athlete policy shows how transphobia has been normalized in society

Wednesday’s announcement by the U.S. Department of Education claiming California violated federal Title IX because it treats transgender student-athletes the same as cisgender student-athletes was another stark reminder of what the 53-year-old federal statute actually means to the people pushing this.

The anti-trans advocates and the largely Republican legislators they breed and feed have consistently been antagonistic to women’s sports, women’s rights, and women’s anything as long as I can remember.

But a wispy California girl named AB Hernandez, who is trans and can extend into a jump pit with aplomb, has become the latest target.

“The … administration will relentlessly enforce Title IX protections for women and girls,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said. “Our findings today make clear that California has failed to adhere to its obligations under federal law.”

Get off the sidelines and into the game

Our weekly playbook is packed with everything from locker room chatter to pressing LGBTQ sports issues.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

The education department ruling gives California’s California Interscholastic Federation 10 days to change the policies and ban trans women and girls from sports “or risk imminent enforcement action,” which was not specified but could include a loss of federal funding.

In addition to the unspecified penalties, the Department of Education wants to retroactively restore records or titles to cisgender girl’s athletes who finished behind trans competitors and said it would “send a personalized letter [to these athletes] apologizing on behalf of the state of California for allowing her educational experience to be marred by … discrimination.”

What were the violations? They seem to contradict what federal judges in recent cases have said. Consider how the U.S. Fourth Circuit of Appeals ruled in a lawsuit concerning West Virginia’s “Save Women’s Sports” law in 2024, where the court stated the act violated Title IX and a transgender student’s constitutional rights.

“The defendants do not dispute that doing so would directly contradict the treatment protocols for gender dysphoria,” the ruling stated. “It also would expose [Becky Pepper-Jackson] to the same risk of unfair competition,” the ruling stated, “and, in some sports, physical danger, from which the defendants claim to be shielding cisgender girls.”

Related

30 adults heckle trans athlete at high school track meet. Her response was perfect.
A high school track meet in Southern California drew 30 people heckling a trans athlete, who seemed unfazed.

The student-athlete in question, now-high school freshman Becky Pepper-Jackson, has been a constant target of anti-trans politicians in her state, including Republican Gov. Patrick Morrisey who referred to the 14-year-old and trans girls like her as “hulking males.”

Similar acts passed in Arizona and New Hampshire have also met challenges in federal court and lost.

These acts are copies of what the February executive order and the demands of the DOE here call for. All seek a total ban on trans women and girls in sports and call for petty revisionism of history by stripping all awards and results from any transgender women and girls who have competed in their respective interscholastic or collegiate sports.

A flawed ‘compromise’

The point that sticks out most in this situation is that amid the threats against the state and the CIF, California’s governing body brought a compromise to the table just days prior to their state track meet.

The compromise allowed Hernandez, or any other trans girl who qualified, to compete while also adding an extra place in an event for the first cisgender girl who didn’t make the cut. The same policy also applied to awards. For example, Hernandez had the best effort in the triple jump and got a gold medal, but so did the next-placing cisgender girl.

Some, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Outsports co-founder Cyd Zeigler, applauded the policy change. I opposed it completely. To me it was a capitulation to anti-trans hysteria, which reduced all the athletes affected to a form of second-class citizenship.

Newsom’s endorsement, as well as his attempts to try to put distance between himself and the CIF in a statement Thursday saying the CIF “is an independent, nonprofit. It is not part of the Newsom Administration,” is galling given how he allowed Hernandez to be misgendered and demeaned by anti-trans advocate Charlie Kirk on his podcast “This is Gavin Newsom” in March.

The irony is that anti-trans advocates opposed this compromise. The simply don’t see transgender people as people with any rights they are bound to respect.

The recent protests against the CIF, which included state-level sycophants of national anti-LGBTQ hate groups, along with the actions of the federal government, prove again that their cries of “fairness” and “safety” are as phony as the president declaring June “Title IX month.”

The difference now is the anti-trans advocates are showing who they are in this moment. Transgender Americans believe them. The question is, will cisgender Americans?

The reaction by many cisgender Americans, or lack thereof, to the last week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that allows states to restrict gender-affirming care for minors in Skrmetti vs. United States gives me a great deal of pause.

And sitting at the center of it is Hernandez and students like her. She’s a senior next year and may have to be scrutinized all over again, even with the CIF policy in place.

This is another ugly sign that shows how much transphobia has been normalized in American society.

Subscribe to the Outsports newsletter to keep up with your favorite out athletes, inspiring LGBTQ sports stories, and more.

The post Fight over California’s trans athlete policy shows how transphobia has been normalized in society appeared first on Outsports.