logo
High School softball players blast Minnesota laws on transgender athletes in new federal lawsuit

High School softball players blast Minnesota laws on transgender athletes in new federal lawsuit

CBS News20-05-2025

A Texas-based nonprofit has filed suit against several Minnesota agencies, including the Minnesota State High School League, alleging that their policy surrounding transgender athletes violates Title IX and undermines fairness and safety for female athletes.
The lawsuit was filed in federal court Monday by Female Athletes United, a nonprofit organization that says it "advocates for fairness, safety, and equal opportunity for women and girls in sports." The organization says it has members across the country, including female athletes participating in high school sports in Minnesota.
"Boys are displacing and defeating girls in competitive sports," the complaint reads, adding that Minnesota's policy allowing athletes to play based on their gender identity "expands opportunities for male athletes to compete and experience victory at the expense of female athletes," according to the plaintiffs.
The defendants listed in the lawsuit include Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minnesota State High School League Executive Director Erich Martens, Minnesota Commission on Civil Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero and Minnesota Commissioner of Education Willie Jett. The suit was filed on behalf of three high school students in Anoka and Dakota counties.
The lawsuit claims that Minnesota's transgender athlete policy, which allows "biologically male students" to compete in female sports if they identify as female, has led to those assigned male at birth "displacing and defeating girls in competitive sports."
The lawsuit specifies that a 16-year-old girl at Maple Grove Senior High School, who is a member of Female Athletes United, competed in varsity softball against a team with a "biologically male athlete" and lost in a regular season game and sectionals.
"Losing at sectionals meant that her team did not have a chance to advance to the state tournament," the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit alleges another Female Athletes United member, a 16-year-old female athlete at Farmington High School, was hit by a pitch thrown by a "biologically male athlete" competing in girls' softball. The girl had "never experienced pain like this when getting hit by pitches on other occasions," the lawsuit said.
The school districts listed as defendants govern the high schools in Maple Grove and Farmington.
In addition to ending the participation of transgender athletes in female sports, the lawsuit seeks to have the defendants "correct all records" where Female Athletes United members lost to "biologically male athletes" or teams that include them.
Ellison's office issued the following statement in response to the suit:
"In addition to getting exercise and the fun of competition, playing sports comes with so many benefits for young people. You build friendships that can last a lifetime, you learn how to work as part of a team, and you get to feel like you belong. I believe it is wrong to single out one group of students, who already face higher levels of bullying and harassment, and tell these kids they cannot be on the team because of who they are. I will continue to defend the rights of all students to play sports with their friends and peers."
And the state's department of human rights said, "The Minnesota Human Rights Act is one the strongest civil rights laws in the country and protects every Minnesotan from discrimination. We will respond in court."
WCCO has reached out to the other defendants named in the lawsuit and are awaiting response.
Ellison earlier sued the Trump administration over its transgender policies
Last month, Ellison announced a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming the president's two executive orders targeting transgender youth and adults violate both the U.S. Constitution and Title IX. The lawsuit requests the court declare the orders unconstitutional and unlawful, Ellison said.
The week before, the Department of Justice sued Maine's education department for "discriminating against women by failing to protect women in women's sports" in what U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi alleged is a violation of Title IX.
Bondi added that the DOJ's actions in Maine could be followed by moves in other states, including Minnesota. Bondi previously sent letters to Ellison and Erich Martens, director of the Minnesota State High School League (MSHSL), warning them "Minnesota should be on notice" and her department "will hold accountable states and state entities that violate federal law."
This story is developing and will be updated.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'
Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'

Fox News

time25 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'

FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., on Wednesday will introduce legislation that would ban congressional stock trading, serving as the House companion bill to Sen. Josh Hawley's, R-Mo., "PELOSI Act" in the Senate. Alford's proposed bill would ban lawmakers and their spouses from holding, purchasing or selling individual stocks while in office, but it allows investments in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds or U.S. Treasury bonds. If passed, current lawmakers would have 180 days to comply with the legislation. Likewise, newly elected lawmakers must achieve compliance within 180 days of entering office. "As public servants, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and avoid the mere appearance of corruption," Alford said in a statement. "Unfortunately, too many members of Congress are engaging in suspicious stock trades based on non-public information to enrich themselves." "These gross violations of the public trust make clear: we must finally take action to ban members and their spouses from owning or selling individual stocks," he added. Under the proposed legislation, lawmakers who continue to make wrongful transactions would be required to hand over any profits they made to the U.S. Treasury Department. The House or Senate ethics committees could also impose a fine on such lawmakers amounting to 10% of each wrongful transaction. House Speaker Mike Johnson endorsed a stock trading ban on Wednesday, saying "a few bad actors" have ruined Americans' trust in lawmakers on the issue. "You want me to tell you my honest opinion on that? I'm in favor of that, because I don't think we should have any appearance of impropriety here," he told reporters during a press conference. President Donald Trump himself endorsed the same ban for members of Congress in an interview with Time magazine last month. "I watched Nancy Pelosi get rich through insider information, and I would be okay with it. If they send that to me, I would do it," he said of a trading ban. "You'll sign it?" the reporter pressed. "Absolutely," Trump responded. Democrats in the House of Representatives have also expressed support for a ban, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., throwing his weight behind the proposal last week.

Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map
Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map

CBS News

time26 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map

Less than a day after Tarrant County commissioners approved a controversial redistricting proposal, a group of citizens filed a lawsuit claiming intentional discrimination. According to the Lone Star Project, the lawsuit claims that Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare and his followers engaged in intentional racial discrimination in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution by drawing the new district lines. "Intentional discrimination is still against the law," said lead legal counsel for the citizen plaintiffs, Chad Dunn. "The map they drew, the process they used to draw it, and the animosity shown to the citizens of Tarrant County violate the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution." Hundreds of residents speak out for, against the redistricting More than 200 people spoke out about redrawing boundary lines during public comment Tuesday night. The majority who spoke were against redistricting, including the mayors of Arlington, Mansfield and Forest Hills. There were still several speakers who expressed their support. Several used the phrase "don't Dallas my Tarrant." Tarrant County "I want to say that I fully support deterring redistricting efforts. These lines haven't been updated since 2010," said Carlos Turcios, the community development committee chairman for the Tarrant Republican Party. Commissioners moved into executive session around 3 p.m. on Tuesday after some tense moments between the two Democrats and the three Republicans. As Commissioner Alisa Simmons expressed all the reasons she is against redistricting, Judge Tim O'Hare abruptly moved to executive session in an effort to limit her comments. O'Hare is spearheading this process and has been clear that it's about partisan politics. He wants another Republican seat on the court to ensure conservative leadership for the next decade. "It's a very divided country and the parties, I'm not sure, have never been further apart in their beliefs," O'Hare said. "I don't apologize for being a Republican. I don't apologize for being a conservative." "It's not partisan. It is racism." Critics believe the redistricting is racial gerrymandering, saying it goes beyond partisan politics and say it dilutes the voting power of minorities. "Absolutely, it's not partisan. It is racism," Simmons said during the meeting. The new map does appear to take areas with high Black and brown populations from precinct two and put them in precinct one. SMU political science professor Calvin Jillson said what the court did is not unusual, but the legality of the new lines comes down to intentions. "Oh, this absolutely gerrymandering – it is the redrawing of electoral boundaries for partisan purposes," Jillson said. "The question is whether the purposes behind the redrawing were actually political, in which case gerrymandering is legal, or racial discrimination, in which case it would not be legal." Check out more on the CBS News Texas YouTube page: contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store