
Trump's Energy Department proposes dismantling parts of Title IX allowing girls on boys' teams
The Department of Energy is preparing to roll back a portion of Title IX requiring that some sports be open to 'the underrepresented sex,' a cornerstone of the federal law against sex discrimination in schools that President Trump's administration has said conflicts with his executive order to restrict trans athletes' participation.
The department plans to rescind a rule that has for decades allowed girls to try out for boys' 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.
The department, which traditionally does not regulate or enforce Title IX, plans to rescind a rule that has for decades allowed girls to try out for boys' sports teams or vice versa when there is no equivalent female team at their school, with some exceptions for contact sports.
The Women's Sports Foundation, a nonprofit organization founded by Billie Jean King, a foundational figure in women's fight for parity in sports in the 1960s and 70s, said the Energy Department's proposal threatens to unravel years of progress and limit athletic opportunities for girls.
'To uphold the spirit and promise of Title IX, we urge for it to be withdrawn,' the group said in an emailed statement to The Hill.
In justifying its proposal, announced last month, the Energy Department said athletics rules allowing girls to compete on boys' teams 'ignore differences between the sexes which are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality,' language from Trump's day one executive order proclaiming the federal government recognizes only two sexes, male and female.
Rescinding the regulation, the department said, aligns with another Trump order declaring the U.S. opposes 'male competitive participation in women's sports' as a matter of 'safety, fairness, dignity and truth.'
The Education Department, which has historically enforced Title IX, has launched more than two dozen investigations 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 'Title IX Month,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the administration 'will fight on every front to protect women's and girls' sports.'
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.
'I'm scratching my head for the motivation behind [rescinding the rule] because they mention the 'Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports' executive order, but it won't 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,' Nussbaum said. 'One, the school doesn't already offer that sport for their sex, and two, they're the 'underrepresented sex' historically, and that's just not male sports at the vast majority of schools.'
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.
An Energy Department spokesperson did not return a request for comment.
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.
The Energy Department's Title IX proposal, submitted as a 'direct final rule,' (DFR) would skirt traditional regulatory channels, allowing it to take effect automatically on July 15 absent 'significant adverse comments,' the deadline for which to submit is Monday.
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.
'None of that applies in this situation,' said Shiwali Patel, senior director of safe and inclusive schools at the National Women's Law Center. 'These are regulations that are long-standing, that have existed for decades.'
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.
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 to streamline the government's handling of Title IX inquiries, citing ballooning caseloads.
'Generally, things have followed kind of a principle of logic — you stick to the things you're experts in, you regulate the things that you are tasked with regulating,' said Maha Ibrahim, program managing attorney for Equal Rights Advocates, a nonprofit gender justice and women's rights organization.
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't usually 'step out of their lane and do the initial regulatory change.'
'This is unusual in an alarming way,' she said.
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, Ibrahim said. In March, the agency shuttered seven of its 12 civil rights enforcement offices and fired hundreds of workers, K-12 Dive reported.
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.
While the Energy Department's 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' and educators' ability to file claims, said Patel, of the National Women's Law Center.
The organization, which advocates for women's 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.
The Title IX proposal is part of a larger Department of Energy push to quickly eliminate or reduce dozens of regulations that it said in May 'are driving up costs and lowering quality of life for the American people.'
'While it would normally take years for the Department of Energy to remove just a handful of regulations, the Trump Administration assembled a team working around the clock to reduce costs and deliver results for the American people in just over 110 days,' Energy Secretary Chris Wright said last month.
The department's deregulatory efforts include terminating or modifying 47 rules that would, once finalized, free up an estimated $11 billion and cut more than 125,000 words from the Code of Federal Regulations, the department said. Rules on the chopping block include diversity, equity, and inclusion requirements for federal grant recipients, which the Energy Department has called 'unscientific.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
11 minutes ago
- New York Post
The Post's Eric Adams support: Letters to the Editor — Aug. 13, 2025
The Issue: The Post's editorial urging President Trump to endorse Mayor Adams for re-election. Wasn't it the New York Post that featured photos of Mayor Adams greeting busloads of illegal immigrants at Port Authority ('The Post says: Endorse Adams Apple,' Editorial, Aug. 8)? Have you already forgotten about the billions of dollars that taxpayers shelled out to house, feed and educate illegals? Advertisement Have you forgotten about all the corrupt politicians Adams surrounded himself with in his administration? One would think The Post would do the right thing for New Yorkers and instead ask President Trump to endorse Curtis Sliwa. Ruth Adler The Bronx Advertisement The Post's support for Eric Adams illustrates a lack of innovation. New York City is primed for a change, which requires the insights of Sliwa. Any other candidate inhabits a 'business as usual' mentality. Advertisement God willing, enough people will stop the madness and give Sliwa his due. Jonathan Kiddrane Queens I urge all New Yorkers to get behind Adams. Advertisement I believe that he cares about New York City and is well aware of the mistakes he has made in his first term. Above all else, he cares about the quality-of-life issues in all five boroughs. He does not want to brainwash us, seize property, close family businesses or make our neighborhoods less safe. Whether you live in Chinatown, Little Italy, Forest Hills, Harlem or elsewhere, Adams will advocate for you. Ken Karcinell Hewlett Adams is the greatest sleazeball since Jimmy Walker during the Roaring '20s. Yes, Andrew Cuomo is distasteful and Zohran Mamdani is over the moon, but going to bat for Adams indicates rabid insanity. Advertisement Doug Brin Brooklyn Has the New York Post lost its mind? How, for the love of God, could you ask President Trump to endorse Adams for re-election? Advertisement Adams has been a complete disaster since his first day in office. Cuomo and Mamdani — the despicable communist — are even worse. Sliwa is the only viable candidate with a chance to bring some semblance of sanity back to our once-great city. John Lucadamo Advertisement Westchester County While The Post raises legitimate questions about Cuomo's record, endorsing Adams overlooks how many of his policies resemble those of Mamdani and Cuomo. Trump would be wise to refrain from any endorsements to avoid involvement in the federal scrutiny the next mayor will likely face over a range of ludicrous campaign proposals. Michael Mulhall Advertisement Moseley, Va. The Issue: The possible cancellation of 'The Howard Stern Show' following a dropoff in listeners. Howard Stern lost his edge years ago when he suddenly went woke ('Bye bye booey: Staff coasting,' Aug. 10). For most of his career, he eschewed good taste and battled critics, going out of his way to be politically incorrect. The more outrageous he was, the funnier he got, and that earned him a tremendous following. But, as Howard's longtime fans know, he is driven by money. When Stern realized his brand of humor could get him canceled, he became a soft liberal. Bill Calvo Brooklyn This is not the old Howard Stern; he is kissing up to the targets, like the woke people he once hated. I have a better opinion of Stern staffers Gary Dell'Abate and Fred Norris than I do of Stern. He shouldn't be offered any extension of his show. The time to pull the plug is now. Sheldon Fosburg Staten Island Want to weigh in on today's stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@ Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.


New York Post
11 minutes ago
- New York Post
Mamdani's ‘war' against Trump spells bad news for NYC
Zohran Mamdani's 'Five Boroughs Against Trump' tour makes oodles of sense for him — but only at the expense of the rest of the city. Not just because the last thing New Yorkers need is a mayor seeking a war with the White House, since they'd inevitably be the cannon fodder. More: Centering the mayoral debate on countering President Donald Trump encourages everyone to ignore all the issues Mamdani doesn't want voters thinking about, like how to make the streets and subways safe, the public schools functional and the local economy growing. It also prevents any focus on his privilege and inexperience, his cop-hatred, his obsessive loathing of Israel and the unworkability of pretty much his entire 'positive' agenda. Truth is, it mainly appeals to the vanity of his Democratic Socialists and their cheerleaders: Already imagining that their guy's surprise victory (in a Democratic primary) puts America on the brink of a new socialist era, they now get to also dream of Mamdani somehow turning the tide against Bad Orange Man. Except that he can't 'stand up' to Trump (beyond boring bits like the legal efforts to claw back improperly canceled grants that Mayor Eric Adams already has under way). Indeed, no mere mayor of any city can. Check the US Constitution: You'll find no mention of a mayoral power to check the president, Congress or for that matter the Supreme Court. And in the real world, a Mayor Mamdani declaring war on Trump would entail setting City Hall on fire and expecting the White House to burn down. New York City has zero leverage over the federal government, except perhaps 1) Wall Street's money — which socialists can't direct except via their trust funds — and 2) whatever power the national media has left — when the media's already done its damnedest to stop Trump. The feds, meanwhile, can screw New York eight ways to Sunday, starting with cutting back on the hundreds of billions it sends our way. Nor can local government 'withhold' New Yorkers' taxes, as some whiz kids in the Legislature suggest. State Attorney General Tish James, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg and a few complacent judges have already waged their worst lawfare against Trump, while then-Mayor Bill de Blasio did what he could against the Trump businesses that remain here. 'Trump-proofing' the city — the new tough talk from progressives around the country — is an empty threat, too: Federal law almost always trumps state and local ordinances. Playing tough guy and talking big is sure to give Mamdani lots of outraged outtakes for his social media. But he is writing checks that the people of NYC will have to pay.


New York Post
11 minutes ago
- New York Post
What to expect from Friday's Trump-Putin summit on US soil: Will a peace deal actually be reached?
WASHINGTON — President Trump's Friday meeting with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin may be the most-watched Washington-Moscow summit in decades — but don't expect any major decisions to be made as the US president seeks a 'more firm understanding' of how to end Moscow's war on Ukraine, sources and experts tell The Post. Trump, 79, plans to treat the meeting as a 'listening exercise' rather than a high-stakes negotiation, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday. While Putin, 72, has set audacious conditions for agreeing to a cease-fire with Ukraine, the US has made no concrete decision to date on whether to support them, sources familiar with the matter tell The Post. What Russia wants Among the demands reportedly pushed by Putin — almost entirely unchanged from the start of the war nearly three-and-a-half years ago — is the formal recognition by the US and Ukraine of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts as Russian territory, despite Moscow being unable to secure them in 11 years of trying. Advertisement 4 Russia's President Vladimir Putin and President Donald Trump attend a meeting on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan June 28, 2019. REUTERS This recognition would include the roughly 30% of Donetsk and Luhansk that Russia does not control. The Kremlin also seeks a freezing of the current front lines. Advertisement The desires were communicated to Trump by Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, who met with Putin at the Kremlin last week, according to European officials. However, Russia has not made these demands public, which is one reason why Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would like a sitdown with Putin — to get the terms direct from the horse's mouth. Russia has also pushed for Ukraine to formally agree to never join NATO, a halt to shipments of Western weapons to Ukraine and a prohibition on NATO-aligned soldiers from setting foot on Ukrainian territory. 4 Putin and Trump last saw each other in 2019. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement Despite the White House insisting the war will be the primary topic, Russian officials have indicated they see the Alaska summit as a prime opportunity to discuss potential deals with the US — including opening up Alaskan airspace to Russian flights. 'We hope that the upcoming summit will give impetus to the normalization of bilateral relations,' Russia's deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told state media site Izvestia, noting that restoration of air traffic could be a possible topic. The Arctic and economic cooperation are also topics that interest Russia, Putin adviser Yuri Ushakov said, noting that the Kremlin hopes the meeting will lead to Trump going to Russia in the future. However, Russia observers have expressed concerns over the Alaska location — particularly as Moscow's hardliners have long 'lamented the loss of Russia's larger territorial extent throughout history,' George Barros of the Institute for the Study of War said Tuesday. Advertisement 'Russian nationalists have manufactured a pseudo-historical argument for why America's purchase of Alaska [in 1867] was illegitimate, and that Alaska is therefore actually legally Russian,' he said. 'This is all nonsense, of course.' 'The Russian nationalist doesn't respect the United States, but rather invents territorial disputes with its neighbors and seethes at Russa's diminished geography.' What Ukraine wants Zelensky, 47, has called Moscow's demands untenable for establishing a cease-fire, but has signaled openness to some concessions — so long as they are made as part of a final peace deal. Ending the war after more than three grueling years would be a positive for Zelensky, as his country has been ravaged by missile strikes, mines and Russian infantry. But the Ukrainian leader has been clear he will not accept peace at any price. 4 In this photo taken from video released by Russian Defense Ministry Press Service on Thursday, July 31, 2025, a Russian Giatsint-S self-propelled gun fires towards Ukrainian positions on an undisclosed location in Ukraine. AP Zelensky has been adamant that Ukraine receive security guarantees, like NATO membership or nuclear weapons, to ensure Russia doesn't invade again in the future. 'It is impossible to talk about Ukraine without Ukraine, and no one will recognize that. That's why this conversation may be important for their bilateral track, but they cannot decide anything on Ukraine without us,' Zelensky told reporters in Kyiv Tuesday. 'I hope the US president understands that and takes into account.' What Trump wants Advertisement Friday will give the president a chance to observe Putin with his own eyes to better assess whether the Russian dictator is 'tapping [him] along' with empty promises of peace, as Trump himself has occasionally suggested might be the case. 'Only one party that's involved in this war is going to be present, and so this is for the president to go in and to get, again, a more firm and better understanding of how we can hopefully bring this war to an end,' Leavitt said. 4 Various aircrafts are seen at Anchorage Ted Stevens International Airport in Anchorage, Alaska, United States on July 2, 2024. Anadolu via Getty Images Secretary of State Marco Rubio similarly described the summit as a 'feel-out meeting, to be honest.' Advertisement 'The president talked to Putin on the phone three or four times, OK? And nothing has come of it — or at least we haven't gotten to where we want to be,' he said. 'And so the president feels like, 'Look, I've got to look at this guy across the table. I need to see him face-to-face. I need to hear him one-on-one. I need to make an assessment by looking at him.'' Trump made ending the war in Ukraine one of his major 2024 campaign promises, and securing a peace deal would provide a major bulwark for his foreign policy legacy. To that end, Trump is expected to raise the issue of land swaps between Russia and Ukraine to gauge Putin's reaction. The US president will also speak to European leaders ahead of Friday's meeting in addition to after the sitdown, sources familiar with the preparations say. 'The next meeting will be with Zelensky and Putin, or Zelensky and Putin and me. I'll be there if they need, but I want a meeting set up between the two leaders,' Trump said Monday. 'There'll be some land swapping.'