Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the complaint names the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation as defendants. The policy at the center of the dispute originates from a 2013 state law that allows students to access restrooms and compete in sports in alignment with their gender identity.

DOJ Targets State Law on Gender Identity Participation

The federal government alleges that this approach disregards basic protections for girls in school athletics. The Justice Department argues that allowing biologically male students to participate in female-designated events causes a competitive imbalance and limits opportunities for girls to fairly compete.

According to the complaint, forcing female athletes to compete against male-identifying students and share locker rooms and other intimate facilities increases the risk of sexual misconduct, including harassment and voyeurism. The DOJ also contends this setting violates the intent of Title IX, the federal civil rights law established in 1972 to prevent discrimination based on sex in education.

“Defendants’ policies and actions are harming girls,” the DOJ states in its filing, claiming that the framework denies girls equal opportunity in school sports and unjustly places them at a physical disadvantage in female competitions.

California Law Remains Firm Despite Criticism

California’s law, Assembly Bill 1266, was signed into effect by former Gov. Jerry Brown in 2013. The legislation mandates that public schools provide transgender students with access to all sex-segregated programs and facilities according to their gender identity, regardless of the gender listed on official records.

At the time of the law's passage, Assembly Speaker John Perez called it a pivotal move forward in transgender rights, stating that it placed California at the forefront of inclusivity. However, opponents, including Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com, strongly criticized the bill, accusing the state of instilling confusing gender ideology in public schools.

“This radical bill warps the gender expectations of children,” Thomasson said, referring to its impact on sex-specific spaces in schools like restrooms and showers.

Trump Administration Moves to Enforce New Executive Order

In February, former President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “No Men in Women’s Sports,” requiring institutions receiving federal education funding to prevent biological males from participating in girls' athletic activities. The DOJ’s lawsuit against California now seeks to enforce that directive.

Harmeet K. Dhillon, U.S. assistant attorney general, emphasized that Title IX was created to protect the rights and safety of women and girls, not to place them at a disadvantage in the name of gender inclusion. She said the department would not ignore the concerns of girls losing out on athletic scholarships, awards, and competitive recognition due to biological disparities.

“Young women should not have to sacrifice their rights to compete” to accommodate policies that conflict with biological differences, Dhillon said.

State Officials Reject Federal Demands

While the Trump administration pushes for national enforcement of its directive, California leaders have firmly stated they intend to uphold the 2013 law. Tony Thurmond, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, announced that the education department would continue to enforce state policy in favor of students participating based on their identity.

“California state law protects all students' access to participate in athletics in a manner that is consistent with their gender identity,” Thurmond stated. He also emphasized the importance of ensuring the safety of all student athletes in the process.

Despite federal pressure, Thurmond made clear that the state would not alter its guidelines to comply with the DOJ’s demands. California’s stance reflects a broader commitment to transgender rights amid mounting legal and political tension.

Funding Threats Intensify Policy Conflict

In May, Trump warned that California could face the withdrawal of federal funding due to reports of a transgender student competing in girls’ long jump and triple jump finals. This added a layer of financial risk to the already contentious debate between state and federal authorities.

In response to public concern and media attention surrounding that incident, the California Interscholastic Federation updated its regulations. Under the revised rules, any female athlete displaced by the participation of a transgender competitor would still be eligible to compete in the final event.

The change aimed to address immediate concerns about fairness while still adhering to the state’s inclusive policies. However, it did not satisfy federal officials, who maintain that the existing structure undermines the equal rights of female athletes.

Ongoing Legal Battle May Set National Precedent

California Governor Gavin Newsom acknowledged the issue in March during a podcast appearance. He said that concerns over fairness in school sports were valid and described situations where male-bodied athletes compete with girls as “deeply unfair.”

Still, Newsom has not moved to overturn or amend the 2013 law. His comments suggest an awareness of the complexities involved, but he continues to support the state’s inclusionary approach.

The outcome of the DOJ’s case could have far-reaching effects on how educational institutions across the country manage gender identity and athletic participation. As legal proceedings unfold, schools, families, and students nationwide are likely to be watching closely.