No federal funding for colleges that don’t recognize trans athletes

whiteshoes97

Head Coach
Gold Member
Dec 30, 2004
12,905
10,757
113
  • Like
Reactions: Oldschool1964

BigCL24

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
May 28, 2016
17,923
34,919
113

slattimer99

Redshirt Freshman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
941
3,275
93
south-park-strong-woman-competition.jpg
 

mhosek

Sophomore
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
1,294
1,031
113
this is fringe left. an executive order basically destroying women's college sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hyattea

mhosek

Sophomore
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2001
1,294
1,031
113

BigCL24

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
May 28, 2016
17,923
34,919
113
Thanks Joe. This was at the top of my problem list. Nebraska needs to hurry and reassign their Men's basketball team to the Women's league so they can win a NC before others catch on!

Trying to read that executive order gives you a headache too. My word
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hyattea

biscuitbagger3

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 9, 2009
4,690
5,205
113
We aren’t sure what the impact of the EO will be as the relevant departments need to make the rules first. I’m certainly against this as an outcome though, hopefully the rules will make it so the OP is wrong.
 

Bobfather

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 6, 2002
14,574
7,491
113
50
I know, but I was trying to humor him and play bi-partisan for bit.

I do disagree with that stance however if true.
No you own it as you voted for it and everytime Bejing Biden does something that you hate I will let you know it is you that did it. Same rules you applied the last 4 years when Trump did something we didn't like and you crowed you should of voted for a woman with 123 kills to her name.
 

AAF Nation

Head Coach
Jul 5, 2013
11,035
33,019
113
Lol absolutely terrible for young women. I hope there's a movement of men who join women's sports, claiming it's their identity and then sue away when they are told no. See how long it'll last. Out of all things, this is the last thing Joe should be concerned with. Instead he goes the Trump route and stokes unnecessary fires. Unbelievable.
 

Bobfather

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Oct 6, 2002
14,574
7,491
113
50
We aren’t sure what the impact of the EO will be as the relevant departments need to make the rules first. I’m certainly against this as an outcome though, hopefully the rules will make it so the OP is wrong.
The point being is this is one of the biggest things of importance in the liberal world and you own it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuskerCK

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,602
9,285
113
No you own it as you voted for it and everytime Bejing Biden does something that you hate I will let you know it is you that did it. Same rules you applied the last 4 years when Trump did something we didn't like and you crowed you should of voted for a woman with 123 kills to her name.
Fair enough.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,602
9,285
113
Still waiting on the link that show this as an executive order.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,602
9,285
113
Ill help you out.


On Racial and L.G.B.T. Equality
Mr. Biden will end the Trump administration’s 1776 Commission, which released a report on Monday that historians said distorted the role of slavery in the United States, among other history. Mr. Biden also revoked Mr. Trump’s executive order limiting the ability of federal agencies, contractors and other institutions to hold diversity and inclusion training.

The president designated Susan E. Rice, who is the head of his Domestic Policy Council, as the leader of a “robust, interagency” effort requiring all federal agencies to make “rooting out systemic racism” central to their work. His order directs the agencies to review and report on equity in their ranks within 200 days, including a plan on how to remove barriers to opportunities in policies and programs. The order also moves to ensure that Americans of all backgrounds have equal access to federal government resources, benefits and services. It starts a data working group as well as the study of new methods to measure and assess federal equity and diversity efforts.

Another executive order reinforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to require that the federal government does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, a policy that reverses action by Mr. Trump’s administration.

Not sure how this is turned into guys get to play women's sports but oh well.
 

Johannes de Silentio

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
May 17, 2016
5,570
24,402
113
Ill help you out.


On Racial and L.G.B.T. Equality
Mr. Biden will end the Trump administration’s 1776 Commission, which released a report on Monday that historians said distorted the role of slavery in the United States, among other history. Mr. Biden also revoked Mr. Trump’s executive order limiting the ability of federal agencies, contractors and other institutions to hold diversity and inclusion training.

The president designated Susan E. Rice, who is the head of his Domestic Policy Council, as the leader of a “robust, interagency” effort requiring all federal agencies to make “rooting out systemic racism” central to their work. His order directs the agencies to review and report on equity in their ranks within 200 days, including a plan on how to remove barriers to opportunities in policies and programs. The order also moves to ensure that Americans of all backgrounds have equal access to federal government resources, benefits and services. It starts a data working group as well as the study of new methods to measure and assess federal equity and diversity efforts.

Another executive order reinforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to require that the federal government does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, a policy that reverses action by Mr. Trump’s administration.

Not sure how this is turned into guys get to play women's sports but oh well.

It's right in the order:

"In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of . . . sex” covers discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Under Bostock‘s reasoning, laws that prohibit sex discrimination — including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Fair Housing Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1522), along with their respective implementing regulations — prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary."
 

BigCL24

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
May 28, 2016
17,923
34,919
113
It's right in the order:

"In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of . . . sex” covers discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Under Bostock‘s reasoning, laws that prohibit sex discrimination — including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Fair Housing Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1522), along with their respective implementing regulations — prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary."

I knew once I saw the Bostock title that’s where the order was headed.
 

BigCL24

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
May 28, 2016
17,923
34,919
113
It's right in the order:

"In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of . . . sex” covers discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Under Bostock‘s reasoning, laws that prohibit sex discrimination — including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Fair Housing Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1522), along with their respective implementing regulations — prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary."

What does that last line mean exactly
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,602
9,285
113
It's right in the order:

"In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of . . . sex” covers discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Under Bostock‘s reasoning, laws that prohibit sex discrimination — including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Fair Housing Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1522), along with their respective implementing regulations — prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary."

Thanks for posting. So for 44 years the Title 9 legislation was in the books and there was never a concern about the transgender stuff until Trump took office?

Does this really point to boys playing girls sports?
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,602
9,285
113
My question too.

prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary." ??????
 

Johannes de Silentio

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
May 17, 2016
5,570
24,402
113
What does that last line mean exactly

I'd have to study the opinion and the analyses of it to be sure, but my initial impression is that Bostock only held that the prohibition on sex discrimination includes sexual orientation and gender identity with respect to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. That's one law, and my understanding is that the Court used traditional methods of statutory interpretation to get there (although opponents of the ruling would certainly contest that they did so accurately).

Primary among canons of statutory interpretation is the maxim that the plain reading of the text cannot be contravened by interpreting tribunals like agencies or courts, because that would be akin to going against the legislative intent. So what they're saying is the Court found no such contrary intent in parsing Title VII. Moreover, in other laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, this reasoning will generally apply. However, if any other laws are written in a way so as to defeat the statutory interpretation that sex includes sexual orientation and gender identity, then this will not apply.

In short, it's essentially saying that sex will be interpreted like it was in Title VII everywhere else except in cases where a plain reading shows a contrary intent. Given that most of these laws were written before this issue was ever foreseen, it's unlikely that contrary intent will be found.
 

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,602
9,285
113
I found it. Not really sure what it all means and to what extent it can reach.

Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation

January 20, 2021 • Presidential Actions






By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. Every person should be treated with respect and dignity and should be able to live without fear, no matter who they are or whom they love. Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports. Adults should be able to earn a living and pursue a vocation knowing that they will not be fired, demoted, or mistreated because of whom they go home to or because how they dress does not conform to sex-based stereotypes. People should be able to access healthcare and secure a roof over their heads without being subjected to sex discrimination. All persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation.
These principles are reflected in the Constitution, which promises equal protection of the laws. These principles are also enshrined in our Nation’s anti-discrimination laws, among them Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.). In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of . . . sex” covers discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Under Bostock‘s reasoning, laws that prohibit sex discrimination — including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Fair Housing Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1522), along with their respective implementing regulations — prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary.
Discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation manifests differently for different individuals, and it often overlaps with other forms of prohibited discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of race or disability. For example, transgender Black Americans face unconscionably high levels of workplace discrimination, homelessness, and violence, including fatal violence.
It is the policy of my Administration to prevent and combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, and to fully enforce Title VII and other laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. It is also the policy of my Administration to address overlapping forms of discrimination.
Sec. 2. Enforcing Prohibitions on Sex Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation. (a) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and in consultation with the Attorney General, as appropriate, review all existing orders, regulations, guidance documents, policies, programs, or other agency actions (“agency actions”) that:
(i) were promulgated or are administered by the agency under Title VII or any other statute or regulation that prohibits sex discrimination, including any that relate to the agency’s own compliance with such statutes or regulations; and
(ii) are or may be inconsistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.
(b) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), consider whether to revise, suspend, or rescind such agency actions, or promulgate new agency actions, as necessary to fully implement statutes that prohibit sex discrimination and the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.
(c) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable, also consider whether there are additional actions that the agency should take to ensure that it is fully implementing the policy set forth in section 1 of this order. If an agency takes an action described in this subsection or subsection (b) of this section, it shall seek to ensure that it is accounting for, and taking appropriate steps to combat, overlapping forms of discrimination, such as discrimination on the basis of race or disability.
(d) Within 100 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall develop, in consultation with the Attorney General, as appropriate, a plan to carry out actions that the agency has identified pursuant to subsections (b) and (c) of this section, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.
Sec. 3. Definition. “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).
Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 20, 2021.
 

BigCL24

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
May 28, 2016
17,923
34,919
113
I found it. Not really sure what it all means and to what extent it can reach.

Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation
January 20, 2021 • Presidential Actions






By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. Every person should be treated with respect and dignity and should be able to live without fear, no matter who they are or whom they love. Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports. Adults should be able to earn a living and pursue a vocation knowing that they will not be fired, demoted, or mistreated because of whom they go home to or because how they dress does not conform to sex-based stereotypes. People should be able to access healthcare and secure a roof over their heads without being subjected to sex discrimination. All persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation.
These principles are reflected in the Constitution, which promises equal protection of the laws. These principles are also enshrined in our Nation’s anti-discrimination laws, among them Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.). In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of . . . sex” covers discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Under Bostock‘s reasoning, laws that prohibit sex discrimination — including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Fair Housing Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1522), along with their respective implementing regulations — prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary.
Discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation manifests differently for different individuals, and it often overlaps with other forms of prohibited discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of race or disability. For example, transgender Black Americans face unconscionably high levels of workplace discrimination, homelessness, and violence, including fatal violence.
It is the policy of my Administration to prevent and combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, and to fully enforce Title VII and other laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. It is also the policy of my Administration to address overlapping forms of discrimination.
Sec. 2. Enforcing Prohibitions on Sex Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation. (a) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and in consultation with the Attorney General, as appropriate, review all existing orders, regulations, guidance documents, policies, programs, or other agency actions (“agency actions”) that:
(i) were promulgated or are administered by the agency under Title VII or any other statute or regulation that prohibits sex discrimination, including any that relate to the agency’s own compliance with such statutes or regulations; and
(ii) are or may be inconsistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.
(b) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), consider whether to revise, suspend, or rescind such agency actions, or promulgate new agency actions, as necessary to fully implement statutes that prohibit sex discrimination and the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.
(c) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable, also consider whether there are additional actions that the agency should take to ensure that it is fully implementing the policy set forth in section 1 of this order. If an agency takes an action described in this subsection or subsection (b) of this section, it shall seek to ensure that it is accounting for, and taking appropriate steps to combat, overlapping forms of discrimination, such as discrimination on the basis of race or disability.
(d) Within 100 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall develop, in consultation with the Attorney General, as appropriate, a plan to carry out actions that the agency has identified pursuant to subsections (b) and (c) of this section, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.
Sec. 3. Definition. “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).
Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 20, 2021.

dude we posted it 3 times above
 

Johannes de Silentio

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
May 17, 2016
5,570
24,402
113
Thanks for posting. So for 44 years the Title 9 legislation was in the books and there was never a concern about the transgender stuff until Trump took office?

Does this really point to boys playing girls sports?

No problem at all.

As to your questions, I think that actually makes sense. This issue has only really gained traction within the past generation, and there has been concern for a while among certain segments of the population about it. What's new is that we're finally seeing concerted efforts to make it legally mandatory to include transwomen in women's sports. That wouldn't have been happening in earnest before the Obama administration.

Moreover, this is not an issue that splits entirely Left v. Right. There are many women who are unsure what to make of including gender identity within sex for purposes of discrimination policy. I think the orthodoxy within the Left is certainly reflected in this XO, but that doesn't mean it won't be controversial among women (and men) who voted for Biden.

So you combine a fairly new issue (transwomen who are open about their identity and are seeking to obtain legal protection to openly participate in women's sports at colleges) and the fact that only two administrations have really had to deal with it in its current form, and I don't think Trump making it a problem "finally" is all that strange.

And, yes, this does point to biological males who identify as women playing sports with biological females. That's the whole point of this. I won't adduce them here, but you can find plenty of examples of transwomen winning various women's athletic competitions even at the high school level.