Teen calls Maine's stance on women's sports 'heartbreaking' as DOJ announces lawsuit
A high school athlete in Maine is speaking out against state policies that allow transgender athletes to compete in women's sports.
Cassidy Carlisle, a cross-country skier, says she's witnessed the effects of such policies firsthand. She recalled an incident from middle school when she encountered a transgender student in the girls' locker room.
"As a 13-year-old girl, when you walk in the locker room and see a biological male standing there, that's something you can't put into words," Carlisle said on "America Reports" Wednesday.
"I knew something was wrong in that moment."
Carlisle says she reported the incident to school administrators at the time, but the experience stuck with her. Now, she's speaking publicly to advocate for what she calls fairness and safety for female athletes.
"It doesn't matter if it's one or 100, you're taking opportunities away from females. And that's not right," she said.
Carlisle's comments come as the U.S. Department of Justice announced a lawsuit against the state of Maine. The suit alleges the state is violating Title IX by allowing transgender athletes to compete in girls' sports, defying an executive order from President Donald Trump aimed at restricting such participation.
"The Department of Justice will not sit by when women are discriminated against in sports," said Attorney General Pam Bondi at a press conference Wednesday.
Maine Governor Janet Mills responded strongly to the lawsuit, defending the state's position.
"Today is the latest, expected salvo in an unprecedented campaign to pressure the State of Maine to ignore the Constitution and abandon the rule of law," Mills said in a written statement.
"This matter has never been about school sports or the protection of women and girls, as has been claimed, it is about states' rights and defending the rule of law against a federal government bent on imposing its will, instead of upholding the law."
"Let today serve as warning to all states: Maine might be among the first to draw the ire of the Federal government in this way, but we will not be the last," she added.
Carlisle, however, pushed back on the governor's claim, saying the issue is ultimately about protecting young women.
"It's all about girl athletes. And if it's not, the fact that you are willing to fight that fight and put your female athletes at jeopardy is heartbreaking," she said.
Carlisle says she and other activists aren't speaking out about this issue for them, but for future female athletes.
"You know it's not about me," said Carlisle. "It's about the generations to come and that we're protecting them."
The Justice Department argues Maine's policies violate federal anti-discrimination law by requiring girls to compete against boys in some athletic events.
An investigation by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon's department concluded Maine was in violation of Title IX. That investigation led to the matter being referred to the DOJ.
The lawsuit follows a separate legal battle between Maine and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which had frozen federal funding over the state's transgender athlete policy. Maine sued the USDA, accusing it of withholding funds that support meals at schools, childcare centers, and programs for disabled adults. A federal judge has since ordered the funding to be restored.
The DOJ's latest action also stems from a high-profile clash in February between President Trump and Governor Mills at a White House meeting. Their dispute over transgender athletes ended with both sides declaring, "See you in court."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
33 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Justice Department's early moves on voting and elections signal a shift from its traditional role
ATLANTA — In North Carolina, it was a lawsuit over the state's voter registration records. In Arizona and Wisconsin , it was a letter to state election officials warning of potential administrative violations. And in Colorado, it was a demand for election records going back to 2020. Those actions in recent weeks by the U.S. Department of Justice's voting section may seem focused on the technical machinery of how elections are run but signal deeper changes when combined with the departures of career attorneys and decisions to drop various voting rights cases.
Associated Press
41 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Justice Department's early moves on voting and elections signal a shift from its traditional role
ATLANTA (AP) — In North Carolina, it was a lawsuit over the state's voter registration records. In Arizona and Wisconsin, it was a letter to state election officials warning of potential administrative violations. And in Colorado, it was a demand for election records going back to 2020. Those actions in recent weeks by the U.S. Department of Justice's voting section may seem focused on the technical machinery of how elections are run but signal deeper changes when combined with the departures of career attorneys and decisions to drop various voting rights cases. They represent a shift away from the division's traditional role of protecting access to the ballot box. Instead, the actions address concerns that have been raised by a host of conservative activists following years of false claims surrounding elections in the U.S. Some voting rights and election experts also note that by targeting certain states — presidential battlegrounds or those controlled by Democrats — the moves could be foreshadowing an expanded role for the department in future elections. David Becker, a former department attorney who worked on voting rights cases and now leads the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the Justice Department's moves represent a departure from focusing on major violations of federal law. 'This would be like the police department prioritizing jaywalking over murder investigations,' he said. A Justice Department spokesperson responded with 'no comment' to an emailed request for more information about the actions, including whether similar ones had been taken in any other states. Actions come amid major changes at the DOJ Conservatives for years have called for an overhaul at the Justice Department in both personnel and priorities. President Donald Trump also has criticized how elections are run, falsely blaming his 2020 loss on widespread fraud. Earlier this year, he signed an executive order seeking a sweeping overhaul of election operations — an authority the Constitution grants to the states and Congress. After his win last November, Trump installed key allies at the Justice Department, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has made similar claims about the 2020 election. Multiple reviews in the presidential battleground states affirmed Democrat Joe Biden's win in 2020, Trump and his allies lost dozens of lawsuits, and even Trump's attorney general at the time said there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Justin Levitt, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the department's civil rights division, said most of the DOJ's actions appeared reasonable and focused on issues that had already been raised by conservative activists in those states. They also are the type that would be expected from a conservative administration, he said, with the exception of the Colorado request. He called that 'well out of bounds.' 'This administration has prioritized grievance, even perceived grievance when there is no basis in fact,' said Levitt, who also served as a senior policy adviser in the Biden administration. 'And it's dismaying, but not surprising, that the civil rights division would do the same.' Department wants records related to the 2020 election The department's request to Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, asked for all records relating to last year's presidential election. Federal law requires those to be kept for 22 months. In the request, the department stated it had received a complaint alleging that Griswold's office was not in compliance with federal law relating to voter registration. The request also directs Griswold to preserve any records of the 2020 election that might still be in the state's possession. Griswold, in an interview, called the request a 'fishing expedition' and said her office responded by providing state voting files. 'I'm not even sure they know what they are looking for,' Griswold said. 'They can request all the data they want, and it's not going to prove anything.' North Carolina elections have been a particular target for Republicans In North Carolina, where Republican lawmakers recently wrested control of the state election board from the Democratic governor, Justice Department lawyers filed a lawsuit accusing state election officials of failing to ensure that all voter records include identifying information, such as a driver's license. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who oversees the civil rights division, said in a statement announcing the lawsuit that accurate voter rolls are critical to ensuring elections are conducted 'fairly, accurately, and without fraud.' The previous board had acknowledged the issue and updated the state's voter registration form. The new board leadership has vowed to address it. Skeptical of the motives In Wisconsin, which Trump won in 2016 and 2024 but lost in 2020, department lawyers recently sent a letter to the state election commission accusing it of not providing a complaint process for those raising concerns. This comes as Republican state lawmakers are pushing legislation to expand the ability to appeal decisions made by the six-member commission, which is equally divided between Republicans and Democrats. Republican lawmakers have long complained about commission decisions they perceive as benefiting Democrats. The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a law firm that frequently defends Republicans on election issues, supports both efforts, said Lucas Vebber, the firm's deputy counsel. 'It's ensuring that Wisconsinites are entitled to have their complaints heard and adjudicated,' he said. 'As something as important as our elections, it's vital to ensure that process is transparent and available to everyone.' Rep. Lee Snodgrass, a Democrat on the Wisconsin Legislature's elections committee, said state law needs some tightening around how election complaints are handled, but she's dubious about the motives of the Trump administration and conservative activists in the state. They are looking for ways 'to cast doubt on election integrity, so if they don't get the results they want they can cry foul,' Snodgrass said. Concerns about future actions In Arizona, DOJ lawyers said the state was not clearly telling voter registration applicants to provide a driver's license if they have one and asked the state to conduct a review to identify any noncitizens. Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, responded by saying Arizona requires those registering to vote in state and local elections to provide proof of citizenship and conducts checks using the state's motor vehicle records. In Oregon, Justice Department lawyers weighed in on an ongoing lawsuit filed by the conservative group Judicial Watch. It alleges the state has failed to comply with federal laws on maintaining voter lists and making these records available for public inspection. John Powers, a former Justice Department attorney who now serves as legal director for the Advancement Project, said he was concerned about the moves coupled with the Justice Department's staff departures and its withdrawal from voting rights cases. Powers said he hoped, with midterm elections next year, that the department would not pursue minor technical issues in a way that could undermine public confidence in elections. 'I would be lying if I said I wasn't concerned about what the future might hold,' he said. ___ Bauer reported from Madison, Wisconsin.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Forget the American flag. These are the flags to fly on July 4 to celebrate liberty
If you want to celebrate your independence this July 4, put your American flags away. Instead, fly a California flag. Or, even better, run up the banner of your county or municipality. The local level is where you stand the best chance of holding onto your liberty. Because the occupier of the White House never stops declaring that he, not we Californians, are the proper rulers of California. Violating law and the Constitution, President Donald Trump maintains that he can put the military in charge of Los Angeles, strip our schools of billions, tell our universities what to teach, impose tariffs on our businesses at his whim, overrule voter-approved environmental laws, deport our immigrant neighbors — even legal residents and U.S. citizens, take health care from our poor, claw back funds from our localities, steal billions from high-speed rail and even decide who gets to compete in high school track meets. It is altogether fitting and proper that Californians pull down the flag on the Fourth. Because Trump almost perfectly resembles the lawlessness of King George III that inspired the Declaration of Independence 249 years ago. The 'long train of abuses and usurpations' listed in the declaration are familiar today — 'he has refused his Assent to Laws … he has obstructed the Administration of Justice … For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world … He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.' Pulling down the U.S. flag would be even more powerful if California's governments did it, too. It also would be an act of defiance — not just of this new American dictatorship, but also of outdated 1953 state flags laws that unjustly paint California as subservient to the United States. Those flag laws say that both American and Californian flags must be displayed 'in all rooms where any court or any state, county, or municipal commission holds any sessions,' 'upon or in front of … each public building belonging to the State, a county, or a municipality' and 'at the entrance or upon the grounds or upon the administration building' of schools. And when both flags are used together, they must be of the same size — but with the American flag 'placed in the position of first honor,' according to Section 436. 'If only one flagpole is used, the National Flag shall be above the State Flag.' C.C. Marin, director of the Independent California Institute, encourages challenges to the custom of American flag supremacy and urges us just to fly the California flag instead. 'California's state flag is a powerful symbol of resistance and unity in the face of a cruel, lawless presidential administration,' Marin wrote recently. 'Flags remind us who's in charge. California is not and has never been a subsidiary of the federal government. … Voluntarily flying our own flag below the American flag is literally a symbol of inferiority and compliance.' Marin suggests that charter cities — which have their own constitutions, take the lead in pulling down American flags because they are exempt from flag laws. Special districts — governments that carry out a special duty, like running a hospital or a utility — also don't have to fly the American flag, Marin notes. For other jurisdictions, where the flag laws apply, Marin has suggestions. First, Californians could insist that state and local governments follow the flag law provisions that the American flag and the California flag must be the same size when they are flown together. That rule is violated in Sacramento, including at the Capitol, where the American flag is bigger than the California flag. Perhaps lawsuits could force compliance. Second, Californians and their governments should consider flying the American flag upside down — which is legal. Doing so is 'a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property,' according to the U.S. Flag Code. The nascent American dictator's military invasion of California obviously qualifies as extreme danger. On a personal note, I love flying flags outside my home, but I haven't decided what I'm doing for the Fourth. Right now, the Canadian flag is up (I value the True North as an ally, even though Trumpists don't), but I may switch to the California flag or the Los Angeles County flag. Or I might raise the Earth Flag, a half-century-old flag showing a photo of Earth taken during the Apollo missions. The flag expresses our planetary commitment to all living things, though I'd fly it in support of the democratically sovereign Humboldt County city of Arcata. Voters there approved Measure M to raise the Earth Flag above the U.S. flag in 2022. That measure is being challenged in court. Meanwhile, the Trump regime just sent out an order barring U.S. government institutions from flying 'activist' flags. Which makes flying the Earth Flag, or other banners of your choice, the perfect holiday expression of independence.
