Minnesota's bill to ban transgender athletes fails
The Brief
Debate on a bill to ban transgender athletes from Minnesota school sports started late Monday afternoon, and has now failed after not getting 68 votes to pass the bill.
GOP authors believe allowing it opens girls up to losing their spot on a team or even dangerous physical interactions, and it's just unfair.
DFL opponents say it's an unnecessary and cruel distraction that ignores established law and demonizes the small population of transgender people.
ST. PAUL, Minn. (FOX 9) - The Minnesota House spent Monday in the longest debate of the year over a GOP bill to block transgender athletes in girls' sports, which failed Monday evening.
What they're saying
The bill to ban transgender athletes from girls' sports in Minnesota failed in the Minnesota House. The House voted 67-66 in favor of the bill, but a 68-vote majority is needed to pass a bill in the House.
Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman released the following statement:
"People of all ages deserve to be loved, accepted, and valued for who they are. At its core, this bill is about how we treat children, and it would allow children to be bullied by adults and other children for not meeting a particular definition of femininity. While Republicans push cruel, divisive bills like this, they ignore the real challenges Minnesotans are facing — like the rising costs of childcare, health care, and housing. Instead of solving problems, they're fueling division."
Author of the bill, Rep. Peggy Scott (R-Andover) released the following statement:
"There are fairness issues and there are safety issues involving girls' sports teams. When it comes to boys' and girls' athletics, how you identify shouldn't matter; how you were born should."
The celebrity case
It's a hot-button issue across the country and the vote drew a celebrity spokesperson to support the bill.
Riley Gaines took center stage in the debate before the debate.
A crowd at the Capitol heard from the former Kentucky swimmer who rose to fame after she tied for fifth place with transgender swimmer Lia Thomas.
A crowd also heard support for trans athletes from another 2022 college swimmer from here in Minnesota.
"I believe in preserving female sports teams," said Rep. Dawn Gillman, (R-Meeker).
For at least ten years, transgender kids in Minnesota have been allowed to participate in sports based on their gender identity.
Republicans want that to end, and they brought Gaines to the Capitol for a rally to boost their bill.
"Minnesotans and Americans alike reject this absurdity," said the former swimmer. "We embrace the America First agenda, and we reject this absurdity."
Challenging gender
The bill debated Monday on the House floor would have banned transgender girls from school sports.
If challenged, a female athlete would have to prove their gender. The House bill no longer describes how that would happen, leaving it up to the schools, but it originally matched a corresponding Senate bill requiring a doctor's note after an examination of the athlete's anatomy, hormone levels and chromosomes.
Authors told FOX 9 they're not aware of any transgender athletes competing now in Minnesota.
But they believe allowing it opens girls up to losing their spot on a team or even dangerous physical interactions, and it's just unfair.
Allowing access
Not all female athletes see it the same way.
"Athletics offers so many benefits, from physical to mental health," said Kara Cowell, another former NCAA championship swimmer. "To educational success and self-confidence. Trans women and girls deserve the same access to these benefits."
Transgender advocates point out that not even 10 of the 520,000 college athletes last year were transgender and none of them was a superstar.
They point to research showing hormone therapy seems to remove any physical advantages.
And they accuse Republicans of creating a distraction by making a boogeyman out of transgender athletes.
"This bill is not about protecting fairness in sports or upholding integrity," said transgender teacher and coach Maggie Dayvis. "Instead, it is a calculated effort to sow division, to amplify fear, and to distract from the larger issue of defunding education."
A similar Senate will was also rejected by the DFL majority on Monday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
26 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump's trade talk delegation is set to face off with China's negotiators in London. Here is what's at stake.
Three top Trump administration economic officials will face off against Chinese negotiators in a renewed effort to break the US-China trade deadlock. Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will be meeting China's delegation in London on Monday. "The meeting should go very well," President Donald Trump wrote in a social media post announcing the talks. This coming meeting will be the first official talk between the two countries since they mutually lowered tariffs in a temporary truce on May 12, after talks in Geneva. The renewed talks follow a 90-minute phone call between Trump and China's leader Xi Jinping on Thursday, a rare direct conversation that Trump later described as "very good." According to Trump, the two leaders also agreed to visit each other in person, without providing more details in terms of a timeline. The Chinese Embassy of Washington did not respond to a request for who would be attending this negotiation from its side. The team they sent to Geneva consisted of Vice Premier He Lifeng, Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang, and Vice Finance Minister Liao Min. Notably, Li has a Master of Laws from the University of Hamburg in Germany and has been part of China's delegation to the World Trade Organization since 2021. International trade experts previously told Business Insider that much is at stake for both China and the US to strike a deal, or at the very least, continue the truce beyond August 12 when the 90-day tariff pause will expire. "The Trump administration made their job harder because the tariff policies they've implemented are costly to Americans and American companies, and therefore, the market doesn't like it," said Philip Luck, director of the CSIS Economics Program. "They are under a lot of pressure to do things fast." Meanwhile, a lawsuit that threatens to undo all of Trump's tariffs enacted under the IEEPA also looms over negotiations with China. Drew DeLong, lead in geopolitical dynamics practice at Kearney, a global strategy and management consulting firm, told BI that if the court strikes down tariffs before trade deals could come to pass, other routes of imposing tariffs could be more complicated and time-consuming. The White House did not provide Business Insider with any additional comment beyond Trump's Truth Social post.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump-Musk feud: Are electric vehicles and Tesla at the heart of the breakup?
The President of the United States of America and one of the world's most influential billionaires are at odds after months of collaboration. The confrontation escalated Thursday with Elon Musk saying Trump would have lost the election without him in a post on X. President Donald Trump in turn referred to his former senior advisor as "the man who lost his mind" in a Friday morning ABC News phone interview. Republican Trump allies are now also speaking out against Musk. Musk's breakup with the administration has been public and is well-documented, with Trump and the Tesla CEO trading calculated jabs like pro boxers. The underlying reason behind the sudden intense feud is a serious cause of concern for some American car buyers. "Clean Coal" has been a popular buzzword for not one but two presidential campaigns for Donald Trump. So, Elon Musk's initial choice to stand beside a global warming skeptic as the CEO of a clean energy and automotive company was puzzling to say the least. At first, Musk's involvement with the administration was seen by many as mutually beneficial, since the CEO could potentially reap the benefits of government contracts for Tesla and SpaceX. The general public quickly soured to the idea of the eccentric CEO playing a key role in the administration. By April 8, Tesla stock had nosedived 41.50% from its January 2 share price. Tesla dealers have been attacked and vandalized while other Americans have staged peaceful protests against Musk's involvement in government and role at the Department of Government Efficiency. So, why would a guy who once wore a "Trump Was Right About Everything" hat suddenly publicly oppose his new bill? The short answer is, the two don't see eye to eye on the automotive industry's most controversial powertrain option. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill could decimate Tesla. President Donald Trump's stance and actions against EV adoption in America includes: Supporting the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, which suggests phasing out a federal EV tax credit that would benefit thousands of Tesla buyers Claiming former President Joe Biden's EV mandate "would kill 40% of the auto industry's jobs", according to Ordering the shut down of many federal electric vehicle chargers and pausing massive federal EV fleet purchases, according to Elon Musk (and Tesla's) stance and actions for EV adoption in America: Elon Musk bio says "Tesla's mission has been to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy" Musk claimed "the world does need electric cars" during a 60 Minutes interview and factory tour, asserting that Tesla has a crucial role in the future of EVs Tesla has collaborated with Ford, GM, Stellantis, Rivian, Volkswagen, Honda, Acura, Hyundai, Kia, Toyota and more to provide Tesla Supercharger access to EVs, making them easier to charge for American drivers Tesla stock recently plummeted in response to the feud between Trump and Musk. The President has also threatened Musk's government contracts amidst the dispute. The bill appears to be the focal point of the rift, but the two clearly have different ideas on what America's future should be. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk may have been able to join forces over their mutual stances on certain conservative points and a hatred of bureaucracy, but their White House tag team was short-lived. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill directly undermines some of the actions Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency have taken since the two united. Trump is 78 years old and expresses a desire to bring America back to a golden age of manufacturing before globalism outsourced American jobs and created a reliance on foreign trade. He also speaks about returning the country to an age where mining and drilling for fossil fuel production were prioritized over environmental concerns. Musk, on the other hand, is a 53-year-old futurist who strives to make humans a multi-planetary species and has made a fortune from innovation and technological disruption. At a glance, the issue seems to be about the One, Big, Beautiful Bill attacking Tesla's bottom line but the two polarizing figures are fundamentally different in terms of future aspirations. Based on Trump's falling out with several former members of the first Trump administration and Musk's known adversarial nature in the private sector, this could be the end for, arguably, the most fascinating duo of 2025. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Donald Trump vs Elon Musk: Could Tesla, EVs be at the art of the feud?
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Scott Galloway sends strong message to Elon Musk about Bill Gates
Podcaster and New York University professor Scott Galloway is well-known for his provocative opinions and smart takes on business, finance and government. That fact includes Galloway's unconventional view on how Social Security ought to be run. It also involves some sharply critical words he recently spoke about Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Galloway, who earns $16 million annually, contends that wealthy individuals, including himself, should not receive Social Security benefits. He advocates for means-testing to determine eligibility, ensuring that the program primarily supports those who depend on it for financial security in retirement. He highlights an imbalance in the system, pointing out that an employee at the company he owns, ProfG Media, earning $160,000 annually contributes $9,000 to Social Security, which amounts to 6% of their income. However, because Social Security taxes are capped at $160,000, someone earning millions - such as himself - still pays only $9,000, despite making exponentially more. Related: Scott Galloway warns Americans on 401(k), US economy threat Galloway sees Social Security as a safety net meant to prevent seniors from falling into poverty, rather than a mechanism for transferring wealth from younger generations to retirees who, collectively, are the most financially well-off generation in history. He argues that substantial reforms are necessary to reduce costs significantly. He believes that political leaders have avoided addressing the issue due to the risks involved, noting that older voters have managed to secure increasing financial benefits for themselves. Galloway asserts that this trend must end and that, by his math, approximately one-third of seniors should not be receiving Social Security. Appearing on a YouTube broadcast of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Galloway explained his view that a number of Musk's actions, such as spearheading the shutting down of USAID, were not to be respected. "Somehow we've decided in America that innovation and money replaces - or obviates, or excuses - depravity." Galloway said. "Or cutting off aid to HIV positive mothers, deciding what veterans should get benefits, cutting off SNAP payments, which have shown to have a positive net return when people run out of money for food at the end of the month." "I mean, I think one of the wonderful things about being an American and quite frankly, for me what it means to be a man and what I try to teach my boys, is the whole point of prosperity is such that you can protect people," he added. More on retirement: Dave Ramsey sounds alarm for Americans on Social SecurityScott Galloway warns Americans on 401(k), US economy threatShark Tank's Kevin O'Leary has message on Social Security, 401(k)s Galloway criticized Musk's behavior, arguing that wealth and success should not excuse problematic actions. According to Galloway, when someone publicly makes offensive gestures such as apparent Nazi salutes, is largely absent from their children's lives, or reportedly struggles with substance abuse, it raises serious concerns. He questions whether such a person should be considered an aspirational figure for young men. Galloway urges people to reflect on how money and status can distort public perception, noting that Musk's achievements - whether in aerospace or autonomous vehicles - are remarkable. However, he challenges the idea that these accomplishments justify moral failings, asking whether society should overlook unethical behavior simply because someone is a visionary or the richest person in the world. Related: Dave Ramsey warns Americans on Social Security Galloway discusses Musk's behavior and mentions billionaire Bill Gates as an example of an immensely wealthy person who is putting his money toward philanthropy and making the world a better place. "Does that mean unlike Bill Gates, he's not using his billions to help people?" Galloway asked. "He's not planting trees the shade of which he won't sit under. I think this is an individual who has literally come off the tracks ... and is using his immense power to get people elected." "Too many of us excuse what is abhorrent behavior," Galloway added. "I think his legacy is not going to be an EV or putting rockets into space. I think it's going to be unnecessary death, disease, and disability of the world's most vulnerable. That is not what it means to be an innovator. It's not what it means to be an American. It's not what it means to be a man." Related: Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary sends strong message on Social Security The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
