US education department to cut funding on Maine for gender-affirming school sports

US education department to cut funding on Maine for gender-affirming school sports

The US Department of Education (DOE) announced Friday its plan to terminate the Maine Department of Education’s (MDOE) federal K-12 education funding for its noncompliance with US President Trump’s executive orders attacking “gender ideology” and gender-affirming educational practices.

The DOE concluded that MDOE has endorsed or allowed school policies allowing males to compete in female sports and occupy women-only intimate spaces. It additionally stated:

[O]ver at least the past two years and continuing in the current school year, at least three male student-athletes have competed in Maine high school girls’ athletic programs for at least five different high schools (so affecting many more times that number of high schools whose female athletes competed against the male athletes).

The DOE’s Office for Civil Rights launched its Title IX investigation of the MDOE on February 21, 2025, in response to Maine Governor Janet Mills challenging Trump to get the courts to make Maine comply with his executive orders. The DOE published its noncompliance finding on March 19 along with a proposed resolution agreement, notifying Maine that it will send a letter of impending enforcement action if Maine does not sign the resolution agreement within ten days from the finding. 

In addition to ceasing the practice of its gender-affirming policy, the resolution agreement would have required the MDOE to make “each school district in Maine to submit to MDOE an annual certification of compliance [and] promptly notify OCR of any credible report that a school district is still allowing a boy to participate in girls’ sports.” It would have also required the MDOE to give recognitions to female athletes who did not receive them due to males participating in women’s sports.

On March 31, the DOE sent the MDOE a final warning letter instructing that it will take enforcement action if Maine does not accept the agreement by Friday.

The DOE’s Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor commented in a press release:

The Department has given Maine every opportunity to come into compliance with Title IX, but the state’s leaders have stubbornly refused to do so, choosing instead to prioritize an extremist ideological agenda over their students’ safety, privacy, and dignity … Governor Mills would have done well to adhere to the wisdom embedded in the old idiom—be careful what you wish for. Now she will see the Trump Administration in court.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 is a federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal funds. President Trump issued Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 to enforce Title IX, notably by requiring girls’ or women’s school athletic opportunities and private spaces (e.g., locker rooms) to be reserved only for biological females. They further ordered federal funding to be cut from educational institutions that did not comply with the orders.

On the contrary, the MDOE supported its stance by stating that the Maine Human Rights Act adheres to Title IX by prohibiting discrimination in education on the basis of a protected class, including the class of “sexual orientation (which includes gender identity and expression)…”

The DOE also announced that it will be referring this investigation to the US Department of Justice for suit in federal court. These developments come after the Trump administration’s announcement to create a Title IX Special Investigations Team to combat “gender ideology” in schools.

The post US education department to cut funding on Maine for gender-affirming school sports appeared first on JURIST – News.

USA: Attorneys general file brief to US Supreme Court supporting Maryland county’s LGBTQ book curriculum

USA: Attorneys general file brief to US Supreme Court supporting Maryland county’s LGBTQ book curriculum

A coalition of 19 attorneys general filed a 31-page amicus brief with the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, claiming a Maryland county’s policy of incorporating LGBTQ-inclusive books into their curriculum with no opt-out option for parents does not violate the US Constitution.

The amicus brief asserted that the use of LGBTQ-inclusive books in the school district’s curriculum without an opt-out option, a policy adopted by the Montgomery County Board of Education in March 2023, falls within public schools’ authority and overriding interest to foster a safe learning environment. The attorneys general further claimed that the policy does not violate parents’ rights to freely exercise their or their child’s religious beliefs under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

The brief encouraged the US Supreme Court to uphold a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denying the petitioners’ request for a preliminary injunction on the grounds that exposure of the petitioners’ children to LGBTQ-inclusive books through the district’s curriculum did not interfere with the petitioners’ free exercise rights.

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, who co-led the coalition of attorneys general, stated: “Preparing our children to engage with and thrive in a diverse society is a central premise of education. Local school districts have the right to determine that the use of LGBTQ-inclusive books helps to foster inclusive learning environments for all our students.”

The US Supreme Court agreed in January to hear the case, filed by petitioners Tamer Mahmoud and Enas Barakat, Islamic practitioners joined by Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox parents, who object to the contents of LGBTQ+ books included in the school’s reading list. The petitioners had filed a lawsuit alleging the policy violated their rights under the First Amendment, stating that it infringes on their right to practice religion as they please.

The amicus brief was signed by the attorneys general from California, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments on the petitioners’ challenge on April 22.

The post Attorneys general file brief to US Supreme Court supporting Maryland county’s LGBTQ book curriculum appeared first on JURIST – News.

USA: Former California police officer awarded $10 million in harassment suit

USA: Former California police officer awarded $10 million in harassment suit

Ashley Cummins, an out lesbian, alleged she was frequently harassed and denied opportunities for advancement based on her gender and sexual orientation.

More: https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/former-california-police-officer-awarded-10-million-harassment-suit-rcna199595

Hungary – Proposed amendment to the ‘Women 40’ early retirement scheme withdrawn

Hungary – Proposed amendment to the ‘Women 40’ early retirement scheme withdrawn

A court decision triggered a legislative initiative to explicitly address the gender status of the beneficiaries of a pension scheme for women.

More: https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/6277-hungary-proposed-amendment-to-the-women-40-early-retirement-scheme-withdrawn

L’intolérance envers les personnes queer ravivée par la droite

L’intolérance envers les personnes queer ravivée par la droite

L’intolérance envers les personnes queer ravivée par la droite

D’après une étude de l’institut Gfs Bern, l’hostilité envers les personnes queer a pris de l’ampleur en Suisse. Si la population se montre généralement ouverte sur les questions relatives à la communauté LGBTQIA+, ses membres sont nombreux·ses à régulièrement faire l’objet de discriminations. L’avenir nous dira si l’extension du champ d’application de l’interdiction de discriminer, inscrite dans l’article 261bis du Code pénal, à la discrimination fondée sur l’orientation sexuelle ou sur le sexe suffira à améliorer la situation.

Plus: https://www.humanrights.ch/fr/nouvelles/lintolerance-envers-queer-ravivee

Joint Statement on behalf of 22 Embassies [including Switzerland] on recent legislation restricting the right of peaceful assembly and the freedom of expression [in Hungary]

Joint Statement on behalf of 22 Embassies [including Switzerland] on recent legislation restricting the right of peaceful assembly and the freedom of expression [in Hungary]

We, the undersigned Embassies, are deeply concerned about the legislation passed on 18.03.2025 in Hungary that results in restrictions on the right of peaceful assembly and the freedom of expression. These human rights are enshrined in Articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. We are committed to respecting, protecting and fulfilling the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all people, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics, and to combating discrimination based on those grounds.

Signed by the following Embassies:

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The United Kingdom.

When 27.03.2025

Source: https://ungarn.um.dk/en/news/days-closed

UK: University of Sussex fined £585,000 for failing to uphold freedom of speech relating to gender/sex controversy

UK: University of Sussex fined £585,000 for failing to uphold freedom of speech relating to gender/sex controversy

Regulator accused of ‘perpetuating culture wars’ after case of Kathleen Stock, who faced protests for views on gender

England’s university regulator has been accused of “perpetuating the culture wars” after fining the University of Sussex a record £585,000 at the conclusion of an investigation into freedom of speech on campus.

It marks the end of a three-and-a-half year investigation into the university’s handling of the case of Kathleen Stock, a philosophy professor who resigned after being targeted by protests over her views on gender identification and transgender rights.

In a ruling that prompted a furious reaction from the University of Sussex and has implications for the wider sector, the Office for Students (OfS) found the institution’s governing documents “failed to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom”. It also identified failings in the university’s management and governance processes.

The OfS criticism was directed at the university’s trans and non-binary equality policy statement, which required course materials to “positively represent trans people” and said “transphobic propaganda … will not be tolerated”. The regulator said it had “a chilling effect”, which could result in staff and students self-censoring.

“An example of this chilling effect materialising in practice is the experience of Prof Stock while at the university. Prof Stock said that she became more cautious in her expression of gender critical views as a result of the policy,” the OfS said.

“There were some views she did not feel able to express, and therefore teach, despite those views being lawful. Other staff and students may have felt similarly unable to express these, or other, lawful views, and not speak about or express lawful views.”

Sussex complained the fine was more than 15 times bigger than any other sanction the OfS had previously imposed and promised to challenge the ruling in the courts. “The way the OfS has conducted this investigation has been completely unacceptable, its findings are egregious and concocted, and the fine that is being imposed on Sussex is wholly disproportionate,” said the university’s vice-chancellor, Prof Sasha Roseneil.

“After three and a half years of trawling thousands of pages of paperwork, whilst never interviewing anyone employed by the university, the behaviour of the OfS sets a dangerous precedent and constitutes serious regulatory overreach in service of a politically motivated inquiry.”

Stock resigned from the university in 2021 over what she called “a medieval experience” of campus ostracism and protests, but she praised the university leadership’s approach latterly as “admirable and decent”.

Sussex said the OfS’s findings meant it was now all but impossible for universities to prevent abuse, harassment or bullying on campuses.

“Universities must be able to have policies and expectations of behaviour that support respectful communication and enable us to manage cultural tensions on campus,” said Roseneil. “It cannot be that we are only able to expect people to obey the law and that poor behaviour can only be challenged in the courts.

“Under this ruling, we believe that universities would not be permitted to expect their staff and students to treat each other with civility and respect. The OfS is effectively decreeing libertarian free speech absolutism as the fundamental principle for UK universities. In our view, the OfS is perpetuating the culture wars.”

Arif Ahmed, the director for freedom of speech and academic freedom at the OfS, said: “These are significant and serious breaches of the OfS’s requirements. Substantial monetary penalties are appropriate for the scale of wrongdoing we have found. However, we have significantly discounted the monetary penalties we initially calculated on this occasion to reflect that this is the first case of its type we have dealt with.

“We hope that publishing our findings in this case is helpful to all universities and colleges as they consider their own compliance with their freedom of speech duties, and ensure they have proper decision-making processes in place.”

The education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, said: “Free speech and academic freedom are non-negotiables in our universities, and I have been clear that where those principles are not upheld, robust action will be taken.

“If you go to university you must be prepared to have your views challenged, hear contrary opinions and be exposed to uncomfortable truths. We are giving the OfS stronger powers on freedom of speech so students and academics are not muzzled by the chilling effect demonstrated in this case.”

More: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/mar/26/university-of-sussex-fined-freedom-of-speech-investigation-kathleen-stock

Activist takes case over Trinidad’s homophobic laws to UK’s privy council

Activist takes case over Trinidad’s homophobic laws to UK’s privy council

Legislation was repealed in 2018 but Caribbean country’s supreme court last week recriminalised the act after appeal

Joshua SurteesFri 4 Apr 2025 06.00 CESTShare

The privy council in London will soon be called upon to make the final decision on a court case to remove homophobic laws in Trinidad and Tobago.

The laws were repealed in 2018 in a high court judgment that struck from the statute book the “buggery law” that had criminalised consensual anal sex since an act passed in 1925 under British rule. However, last week Trinidad’s supreme court upheld a government appeal against the ruling and recriminalised the act, dealing a hammer blow to LGBTQ+ rights in the Caribbean country and prompting the UK Foreign Office to update its advice for LGBTQ+ travellers.

The 2018 case was brought by Jason Jones, an LGBTQ+ activist. This week he said he would continue the fight before the privy council – Trinidad’s final court of appeal. Central to his argument will be the controversial “savings clause”, which former British empire jurisdictions such as Trinidad can revert to whenever a challenge is made to their constitution.

More: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/04/case-trinidad-homophobic-laws-uk-privy-council

Two LGBTQ+ women in ‘grave danger’ after being arrested by Taliban in Afghanistan

Two LGBTQ+ women in ‘grave danger’ after being arrested by Taliban in Afghanistan

Two LGBTQ+ women are said to be in “grave danger” after they were arrested by the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Maryam Ravish, 19, and Maeve Alcina Pieescu, 23, reportedly had plans to leave Kabul on a Mahan Airlines flight to Iran, with Maryam’s girlfriend Parwen Hussaini. 

The bookings had been arranged with the help of Roshaniya, an Afghan LGBTQ+ network. But before they had the chance to escape, Ravish and Pieescu were arrested by Taliban authorities.

More: Two LGBTQ+ women in ‘grave danger’ after being arrested by Taliban in Afghanistan