Trump-linked group says California lacks standing in trans-sports lawsuit

A Trump-linked legal watchdog contends that California lacks standing to pursue its lawsuit against the Trump administration over a school-sports order, citing public records requests that, it says, turned up no documentation of harm to the state. America First Legal (AFL), founded by a top adviser to former President Donald Trump, said letters from a state attorney and the California civil rights agencies indicate that no records exist to show harassment, abuse, or discrepancies in competition outcomes involving transgender athletes. AFL filed multiple open-records requests with California agencies asking for proof that the administration’s executive order requiring schoolchildren to compete in sports leagues aligned with biological sex caused specific harm. California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued the federal government in June to block EO 14168, arguing that the order would cause “severe harm” to athletes.

In a reply to AFL, the California Civil Rights Department and the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) said they could not locate records responsive to AFL’s harassment-related inquiries or to requests about records of competitions won by transgender girls. The California Department of Education did not respond to AFL’s requests. A CIF law-firm representative told AFL that, based on CIF’s good-faith interpretation of the request, CIF does not possess documents responsive to the inquiries. The civil-rights department’s records custodian delivered a similar message of no responsive documents. AFL officials argued that the absence of records undermines California’s claims of harm, suggesting the state cannot prove any Californians have suffered actual harm as a result of EO 14168.

AFL vice president Dan Epstein said the lack of responsive records shows the state’s standing to sue is questionable, questioning how California can say transgender athletes will suffer harm when its civil-rights department “does not maintain data.” AFL characterized the response as evidence that California’s lawsuit relies on “lawfare” rather than verifiable harm, suggesting the strategy is collapsing under its own lack of evidence. AFL described the findings as undermining one of the administration’s highest-profile legal battles against the Trump policy, arguing that the state’s actions exemplify a need to reexamine its legal posture.

Meanwhile, on Thursday, California Attorney General Bonta addressed a related suit in which the Trump administration challenges California’s policies toward transgender boys competing in girls’ sports. Bonta said the office would defend California laws and the rights of all students, including transgender students, to be free from discrimination and harassment. The federal filing contends CIF has engaged in illegal sex discrimination by allowing biological males to compete against females in violation of Title IX. DOJ officials reiterated their commitment to pursuing the case in federal court, noting that Title IX was enacted to protect women and girls from discrimination in sports. The department has also suggested that federal funding for California’s education department, totaling billions of dollars, underpins its case. In a statement quoted by officials, Attorney General Pam Bondi asserted that California’s own leadership has acknowledged the fairness concerns in allowing competition with transgender athletes, framing the DOJ action as a defense of equal opportunities for women and girls in sports. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon also commented, underscoring the administration’s position that Title IX remains a crucial shield against discrimination in school athletics.

The parties’ filings come as the California Department of Education declined to comment on the developing litigation, stating that it cannot comment while litigation is pending. Charles Creitz, a Fox News Digital correspondent, noted that the article’s broader context includes ongoing debates over transgender participation in youth and high-school sports and the United States Department of Justice’s role in enforcing civil rights protections under federal law. The dispute centers on EO 14168, an executive order the California lawsuit argues runs counter to state initiatives that aim to protect transgender students while ensuring fair competition. Proponents say the policy supports nondiscrimination and equal access, while opponents argue it threatens opportunities for female athletes. The case, like other fights over gender in sports, has become a focal point in broader national debates on rights, safety, and fairness in education.

As the legal back-and-forth continues, AFL’s examination of state records adds a new layer to the scrutiny of California’s stance. The group has positioned its public-records push as a check on what it calls the administration’s aggressive litigation. California officials have maintained that the state is acting in defense of its students’ rights and safety, while federal authorities argue that adherence to Title IX is essential to protecting equal opportunities in sports. The evolving dispute highlights how records requests and court filings can influence the public perception of state standing in high-profile, politically charged cases. The dialogue surrounding EO 14168 and related California policies is likely to continue into the coming months as courts consider the scope and application of federal civil-rights protections in school athletics.