Department of Education’s New Title IX Rule Just as Bad as Expected

By Sarah Parshall Perry | The Daily Signal

Under the Biden administration’s sweeping new Title IX rule, any K-12 school or institution of higher education that receives any federal funding would have to open girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms to biological boys who claim to “identify” as girls. (Photo: Getty Images)

The Department of Education just released its long-delayed Title IX rule—a rewrite of the 50 year-old civil rights law so vast that it promises to turn Title IX’s guarantee of sex equality in education completely upside down.  

Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 is all of a single sentence. It simply bars sex discrimination in any federally funded education program. It does not matter how much federal funding a school or institution of higher education receives. And it does not matter whether such funding from the federal government is direct or indirect. So yes, even the vast majority of private schools must comply with the rule.   

But this simple longstanding prohibition on sex discrimination has been manipulated by the Biden administration to both undermine constitutional freedoms—like the freedom of speech—and erase the very women that Title IX was enacted to protect.  

The Department of Education has unilaterally expanded the prohibition against discrimination based on “sex” to include a prohibition against discrimination based on: “sex stereotypes, sex-related characteristics (including intersex traits), pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity.” 

Under the Biden administration’s sweeping new Title IX rule, any K–12 school or institution of higher education that receives any federal funding would have to open girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, housing accommodations, sports teams, and any other sex-separated educational program or offering to biological boys who claim to “identify” as girls. Similarly, boys’ facilities would have to be accessible to biological girls who “identify” as boys. 

And the law’s decimation of equality doesn’t stop there. The regulations also eliminate due process protections for students accused of sexual misconduct (like the right to call witnesses, introduce evidence, or be represented by counsel during an investigation), and violates the First Amendment to the Constitution by forcing teachers and fellow students to use of a student’s “preferred pronouns.”  

The regulations also require K-12 schools to accept a child’s gender identity regardless of biological sex without providing any notice to, much less seeking the approval of, the child’s parents. 

And while the Education Department has punted, at least for the moment, on its second Title IX rule—one that applies only to athletics—the Biden administration’s representation that sports are not included in today’s rule is a complete head fake. By expanding the definition of “sex” to include “gender identity” and applying the rule to all “extracurricular activities,” male and female athletic teams will be a thing of the past. Indeed, the word “athletics” appears in the new rule at least 31 times. 

Furthermore, the Department of Education’s reading of Title IX lacks any support in the text of the title, its implementing regulations, and the law’s congressional history.

Congress had a chance in 1987 to amend the Title IX “sex” definition to include “gender identity,” when it amended Title IX under the Civil Rights Restoration Act. But it did not.  

Executive agencies are empowered only to promulgate “rules” or “regulations” that implement or interpret laws passed by Congress—not to create completely new laws.

Apparently, the Department of Education has forgotten that.   

Now the question isn’t if legal challenges will follow, but how fast they’ll come.  

The Independent Women’s Law Center has already indicated it is readying a lawsuit against the Department of Education. Others are likely to follow. Let’s hope so.

Go Gators: Statement From University of Florida After Arrest of Campus Occupiers Was Perfection

By Sister Toldjah | RedState.com

AP Photo/Chris O'Meara

While Ben Sasse left quite a bit to be desired during his time as a United States Senator from Nebraska, his administration's handling of the pro-Hamas protesters at the University of Florida, where he is now president, has been a case study in how it's done.

As RedState previously reported, the encampments we've seen crop up at other higher education institutions like Columbia University and UCLA were strongly discouraged from the outset at the U of F, as were other things, like "protests inside buildings, ... blocking egress, building structures" and the like. 

They also noted the consequences, which included "a 3-year trespass and suspension." Employees," they also warned, "will be trespassed and separated from employment."

In other words, free speech is fine and will be protected, but the nonsense that impedes the rights of others, not so much.

As per the norm, though, some agitators didn't listen. As a result, nine were arrested Monday, including at least one for spitting on an officer.

In response to outcry from protest "leaders" and their defenders, here's what the school's spokesman, Steve Orlando, had to say:

“This is not complicated: The University of Florida is not a daycare, and we do not treat protesters like children — they knew the rules, they broke the rules, and they’ll face the consequences. For many days, we have patiently told protesters — many of whom are outside agitators — that they were able to exercise their right to free speech and free assembly. And we also told them that clearly prohibited activities would result in a trespassing order from UPD (barring them from all university properties for three years) and an interim suspension from the university. For days UPD patiently and consistently reiterated the rules. Today, individuals who refused to comply were arrested after UPD gave multiple warnings and multiple opportunities to comply.”

In other words, FAFO is in full effect, which is refreshing to see and a far cry from Columbia's coddling of pro-Hamas demonstrators, which unfortunately ushered forth a very predictable outcome, as we reported earlier.

"Go Gators" is not a chant you typically hear from people who aren't Florida Gators fans, but in this writer's case, an exception to the rule is being made.

"Go Gators," and please keep up the good work in making critically important distinctions between what protecting free speech means versus zero tolerance policies designed to make the school safe, secure, and welcoming for others, especially at a time when cries of "First Amendment violations" are running wild.

___________

RELATED ARTICLES

Pro-Hamas VCU Students Tried to Fight Off Virginia State Police Last Night

Columbia Issues Warning to Students and Staff After Pro-Hamas Agitators Occupy Building

How One Campus Protester Typifies the Problems Universities Have Invited Upon Themselves

Northwestern Folds to Hamas Supporters, Will Provide Scholarships to 'Palestinians' and Other Insanity

UT-Austin Protestors Hit With Pepper Spray by Police, Have Meltdowns When Carted Off

DEAD MAN WALKING

BY SCOTT JOHNSON | POWERLINE

Hugh Gallagher explored what he called FDR’s Splendid Deception in his 1985 book of that title. In the title Gallagher was referring to FDR’s concealment of the polio-related paralysis that struck him in 1921. Gallagher was also a polio victim who understood the pain underlying Roosevelt’s efforts.

Researching the book, Gallagher found that among the 35,000 photographs of Roosevelt at his presidential library, only two featured him in his wheelchair. Media of the day cooperated by ignoring his polio. Roosevelt himself went to extraordinary lengths to convey the impression that he could walk.

“[T]he overwhelming fact about [FDR] is that he was horribly crippled, and yet through sheer persistence and will, rose above his lower body” — so wrote my teacher Jeffrey Hart in his memoiristic history of America in 1940, From This Moment On. Hart added: “In rising above his crippled body and seeming to walk again…Roosevelt told everyone that America rise again and walk too.” Put to one side that we had to rise again in 1940 by overcoming Roosevelt’s domestic policies.

Accepting the premise that Roosevelt’s deception may have served a higher purpose, I would contrast it with the ludicrous stage management of the Biden puppet masters. Yesterday Axios reported: “President Biden has introduced a change to his White House departure and return routine: Instead of walking across the South Lawn to and from Marine One by himself, he’s now often surrounded by aides…With aides usually walking between Biden and the press’ camera position outside the White House, the visual effect is to draw less attention to the 81-year-old’s halting and stiff gait[.]”

According to reporters Hans Nichols and Alex Thompson, “Some Biden advisers have told Axios they’re concerned that videos of Biden walking and shuffling alone — especially across the grass — have highlighted his age.” Axios suggests that the stage management emanated from the windmills of Biden’s mind — the reporters attribute the idea to Biden himself. If so, he must be firing on both of his remaining cylinders. Has he got any ideas for covering up the identity of his designated successor in case of his death during a second term?

Biden’s pitty-pat steps manifest his infirmity and serve as a metaphor of his age-related mental decline. What we have here is the Weekend At Bernie’s presidency, dead man walking variation. At RedState Nick Arama looks to the ocular proof supporting the Axios story in “CONFIRMED: Watch the Cover-Up by Handlers in Real Time as Joe Biden Shuffles From Marine One.”

It seems to me a tad late to cover up the visible manifestations of Biden’s decline and debility. Everyone has seen them. They remind us of the idiotic policies for which he has fronted since the first day of his presidency: open the borders, roll out the welcome mat for illegal aliens, suppress domestic energy production, make life easy for the genocidal maniacs running Iran, require that men who say they’re women must be treated as such, give me that old-time DEI religion. Biden shouldn’t be able to squeeze the toothpaste back into the tube by surrounding himself with physically capable aides, although the mainstream press will play its part to accommodate his and their laughably squalid deception

Her Love & Gratitude Jewelry: A customizable necklace designed by Melania Trump to honor all mothers

This necklace, designed by Former First Lady Melania Trump, is called “Her Love & Gratitude” and is just in time for Mother's Day, May 12. 

Let's honor and celebrate all mothers with love and gratitude.

You can purchase this lovely, dainty flower pendant from Former First Lady Melanie Trump's shop on her personal website for $245.

This beautiful keepsake comes with "One-of-a-Kind Customization." 

Each necklace can be engraved with names, initials, or significant dates to create a one-of-a-kind piece of jewelry. The flower pendant measures 1 inch, includes a 16-20 inches adjustable chain, and is made in gold vermeil. Former First Lady Melania Trump's signature is included on each necklace.

CLICK HERE TO VISIT THE WEBSITE.

One-Tenth of One Percent

By J Garrett 

College campuses across America, especially Columbia. Yale, NYU, USC, are being overrun by anti-Israel, pro-Hamas demonstrators. USC has even canceled its graduation ceremony due to security concerns relating to anti-Israel protests. These protesters are responding to Israel’s response to Hamas’ October 7 terrorist attack on Israel where 1,400 innocent Israeli civilians were targeted and murdered by Hamas terrorists, and somehow, these moral geniuses are protesting Israel.

They are protesting the country that had their elderly shot in cold blood, their women brutally raped and murdered, and their babies beheaded. The country that suffered those atrocities is being vilified and protested. But this is what Islam does. It twists and vilifies the justified actions of their enemies to their own gain. So, Islamic terrorists attack Israel, Israel fights back, and Israel is painted as the bad guy.

The Muslims completely memory hole the fact that they drew first blood because in their mind, they can do whatever they want with impunity. No one’s speaking about all of the vicious murdering that the Islamic terrorists did. We’re supposed to forget about that, or ignore it, or write it off because those are just extremists, and they don’t represent all of Islam. But where are the Islamic leaders who are denouncing what happened on October 7 in the name of Islam? Why do they refuse to distance their religion from the terrorists? Where is Kareem Abdul-Jabbar? Where is Kyrie Irving? Where is Barack Obama? They are imitating crickets. 

Every time there is an Islamic terrorist attack, the Muslims in America are not required to stand up and denounce the attack. Only the non-Muslims are warned about Islamophobia. We haven’t even processed the terrorist attack, and we’re being accused of Islamophobia because Muslims targeted another group of people because of their religion. Every white person in America has to denounce white supremacy over and over and over again. We have to denounce slavery that ended 160 years ago, but Muslims are never required to denounce Islamic terrorism that happened the day before. And they never do because many tacitly approve.

This is the way it always works with Islam. Between the 6th century AD and the 10th century AD, the Muslims invaded and took over all of Byzantine Christianity, sacking city after city, town after town, murdering and raping, and giving the people a choice – convert to Islam or die. 

The Muslims took over all the Holy Lands, and pushed into Southern France and Southern Italy, leaving a river of blood in their wake. We never hear about that, but when the Pope organizes the Crusades to take back the Holy Lands and southern Europe which had been stolen from the Western world by Muslims, the Crusaders are painted as the bad guys. 

Most of the ancient mosques in the Middle East used to be Christian churches that the Muslims turned into mosques after they conquered that city by force. They never mention all the murdering brutality that the Muslims did which created the need for the Crusaders. But the Crusaders are always framed as the bad guys and Islam is always portrayed as the innocent victims.

The Ottoman Empire is the only empire in the history of the world, that is never taken to task for the mass atrocities that they committed in building their empire. The Roman Empire, the British Empire, the Spanish Empire – the historians are brutal to them. They point out every crime that was ever committed under those empires, but the Ottoman Empire gets a free pass, even though the Ottoman Empire was probably the most brutal empire that ever existed in the world. 

Why? 

Because they are Muslim, and pointing out the crimes against humanity that Muslims committed across history would be considered Islamophobia. The Muslims in the Middle East never have to apologize or self-flagellate because the Muslims stole all that land from the Christians and the Jews.

The Muslims are now fighting to their death over a sliver of land in the Middle East. The entire land mass of the Middle East is 5,000,000 square miles. The state of Israel is 8,600 square miles. The amount of land that Israel occupies in the Middle East is one-tenth of one percent. For perspective, the United States is 3,800,000 square miles. 

The state of New Jersey is 8,700 square miles. The Indian reservations in the United States combined are 87,000 square miles which is 10 times bigger than all of the state of Israel. Are people in America appalled that there are Indian reservations in America? It is so small of percentage of the United States, that the average citizen doesn’t even notice that these Indian reservations exist. 

Yet the entire Muslim world is fixated on one-tenth of one percent of the landmass in the Middle East that happens to be the state of Israel. There are 9 million Jews who live in Israel, while only 5.2 million Native Americans live on Reservations in the US. So, almost half as many people live on 10 times as much land, and we are told that we need to give more land to the Native Americans, and at the same time we are told that the 9 million Jews should be expelled from Israel from the “river to the sea.”

Can anyone please explain how the Jews in Israel who live in 0.1% of the land mass in the Middle East and are surrounded by 99.9% of the Middle East that are hostile to them, are the oppressors?

The anti-Jewish Muslims act like the United Nations creating the state of Israel in 1948 was some sort of abomination to the ancestral lands that go back thousands of years. All of these states in the Middle East do not go back even hundreds of years. They were created in the 20th century, around the time that the Ottoman Empire fell. 

Kuwait was created in 1913; Turkey and Syria in 1920; Jordan in 1921; Egypt in 1922; Iran in 1925; Iraq and Saudi Arabia in 1932. So, the idea that these countries are appalled that the state of Israel was created in 1948 is ludicrous considering that their own countries were created just a few years earlier.

In 1948, when Israel was formed, there were millions of Jewish people living in the surrounding countries in the Middle East. 99% of those Jewish people were kicked out of their countries, had their houses and property taken from them by the government, so they were forced to come to Israel. 

There were only about 300,000 Palestinians in what is now Israel at that time, now there is 2.5 million, but Israel is still accused of committing genocide against the Palestinians even though the Palestinian population has increased by 8 times since 1948. 

The original two states solution was Jordan for the Palestinians, but the Palestinians refused to go to Jordan and Jordan refused to accept the Palestinians, thus this eternal conflict was manufactured.

But this conflict is not about land. It's about hatred. The number one religious group that is a victim of persecution and death because of their religion in the world are Christians living in Muslim countries. 

Why are the Muslims murdering and slaughtering the Christians in the Middle East?

I thought it was the Israelis who stole the Palestinian's land? 

They hate Christians as much as they hate the Jews. 

The problem in the Middle East is not a land dispute. It is about the Muslims hating every other religious group and wanting to kill them. The land in Israel is just an excuse to do that to the Jews. 

This is the 21st century, and the Muslims are at war with the Jews, the Christians, and the Hindus because of their religion. But we’re being accused of Islamophobia because we’re reacting to the hate of the Muslims.

Don’t believe the Muslims hate the Jews? 

One of the leaders of the anti-Israel Gaza Solidarity Encampment at Columbia University, Khymani James, openly stated in a live-stream of an official university inquiry in January that “Zionists don’t deserve to live.” He also challenged Jewish people to “meet up and fight” and warned them that he “fights to kill.” 

So, he threatened to kill Jews in January, and no disciplinary action from Columbia University. But he is just one person, you may point out. 

Okay, but where are all the Muslims in America tripping all over themselves to denounce this call to violence against the Jews? Cricket… Cricket… Cricket…

Whenever any random white person says anything that is considered racist, politicians and celebrities have microphones jammed in their faces and they are required to denounce the racism. 

Most white people publicly denounce the racism without prompting. 

But where are the Muslims in the America publicly denouncing the hatred and call to violence against the Jews that we are seeing on college campuses? Nowhere. And their silence speaks volumes.

This never-ending conflict all goes back to the Muslim world hating Jewish people so much that they refuse to allow Israel to have one-tenth of one percent of the land in the Middle East. 

Millions of people have died because the Muslim world can’t say, ‘we will take 99.9% of the Middle East, and the Jewish people can have 0.1%.’ 

That is what is being fought over. Understand, that 0.1% of land, statistically, is absolutely nothing to the Muslim world, but that 0.1% of land is everything to the Jewish people, because it is all they have. 

And the Muslim world refuses to allow them to have even that, and thus they refuse to allow anyone else to have peace.

__________________

J Garrett is a graduate of Princeton University. He has been a contributor to the website Real Clear Politics. He has recently published his first novel, No Wind.

TRUMP IN THE SUPREME COURT

BY JOHN HINDERAKER | POWERLINE.COM

Former President Donald Trump appears at Manhattan criminal court before his trial in New York, Friday, April 26, 2024. (Jeenah Moon/Pool Photo via AP)

Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s case against Donald Trump was argued in the Supreme Court today. The issue is the extent to which ex-presidents are entitled to immunity for acts committed while they were in office. The New York Times covered the arguments with live updates. Here are some excerpts:

Overall, several justices — maybe a majority — appear to have suggested through their questions that presidents should indeed enjoy some level of immunity from criminal prosecution. The questions seem to be how to decide what actions are protected from criminal charges and whether the allegations in Trump’s indictment in particular would qualify for immunity.

Presidents surely should have immunity with regard to some official acts, perhaps all. There is no question about the fact that some presidential acts are immune:

Dreeben says there are some core constitutional functions of a presidency — he cites the pardon power, the power to recognize foreign nations, the power to veto legislation, the power to make appointments — that Congress cannot regulate and so criminal statutes cannot be applied to such actions. Justice Gorsuch declares that is essentially immunity for some official acts.

Smith is persecuting Trump under a fraud conspiracy statute that, as some justices pointed out, is vague:

Justice Alito now joins Justice Kavanaugh in suggesting that the fraud conspiracy statute is very vague and broadly drawn. That is bad news for the indictment brought against Trump by Jack Smith, the special counsel.

The Times reporters are grotesquely biased against not just Trump, but Republicans. For example:

During the George W. Bush administration, memos about post-9/11 surveillance and torture were written by a politically appointed lawyer with idiosyncratically broad views of a president’s supposed power, as commander in chief, to authorize violations of surveillance and torture laws. The Justice Department later withdrew those memos as espousing a false view of the law, but held that officials who had taken action based on those memos could not be charged with crimes.

The “politically appointed lawyer with idiosyncratically broad views of a president’s power” was, I believe, John Yoo. No Democrat could ever be a politically appointed lawyer with idiosyncratic views. And Yoo’s views were not idiosyncratic. I don’t recall that either he or anyone else wrote memos about the president’s “supposed power…to authorize violations of surveillance and torture laws.” The memos I recall addressed the question of what constitutes “torture” within the meaning of federal law, and concluded–correctly, in my opinion–that the interrogation techniques then being used on terrorists were not torture within the meaning of the statute. The “Justice Department”–that is, the Democratic Party Justice Department under Barack Obama–did withdraw those memos, in what I think was a political act. But of course, those lawyers were not “politically appointed” and didn’t have “idiosyncratic views.”

But that was all a digression. Steve no doubt knows more about it.

The Supreme Court justices no doubt care about the future prospect of either 1) lawless presidents or 2) a cycle of meritless prosecution of presidents once they leave office. (And believe me, when Joe Biden leaves office I hope Republicans can find a way to bring multiple criminal prosecutions against him.) But Jack Smith cares only about getting a conviction between now and November, however flimsy his theory may be. That appears doubtful; this is the Times’s summation:

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared ready on Thursday to rule that former presidents have substantial immunity from criminal prosecution, a move that would further delay the criminal case against former President Donald J. Trump on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election.

Such a ruling would most likely send the case back to the trial court to draw distinctions between official and private conduct. Those proceedings could make it hard to conduct the trial before the 2024 election.

Which would defeat the whole point of Smith’s prosecution. Finally, a comic note:

But a ruling in early summer, even if it categorically rejected Mr. Trump’s position, would make it hard to complete his trial before the election. Should Mr. Trump win at the polls, there is every reason to think he would scuttle the prosecution.

Well yes, one would think so!

DA Finally Reveals Underlying Crime Trump Allegedly Committed, and the Bidens Should be Nervous

By Jennifer Van Laar | RedState.com

AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura, Pool

Prosecutors in Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's office have finally revealed the underlying crime they allege Donald Trump was committing when he allegedly falsified business records.

According to Fox News, "New York prosecutor Joshua Steinglass on Tuesday said the other crime was a violation of a New York law called 'conspiracy to promote or prevent election.'"

That law, New York Law 17-152, reads:

Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Speaking of Michael Cohen, former National Enquirer owner David Pecker, and Donald Trump, Steinglass' co-counsel Michael Colangelo argued that in 2015:

"Those three men formed a conspiracy to influence the election."

However, none of the allegedly falsified business records were dated in 2015; every alleged instance was in 2017. The falsified payments are transactions in which Trump's business paid Cohen; Trump says the payments were for legal services and not reimbursement for any monies Cohen might have paid to Stormy Daniels.

Speaking of Daniels, she still owes Trump $300,000 plus interest after pursuing a frivolous lawsuit against him. 

According to Colangelo, the mechanics of the "catch and kill" conspiracy were that Cohen would notify Pecker about stories that Trump wanted buried, Pecker would buy the information and the rights to the story so that the story wouldn't be published anywhere. The ultimate source of the funds used to purchase the rights to the stories, according to prosecutors, was Trump, through his payments to Cohen.

In addition to the alleged payoff to Stormy Daniels, Colangelo said there were two other instances in which the practice was used:

One was to block a story that a former Trump Tower doorman was trying to sell about an alleged out-of-wedlock child. Colangelo said the payment was $30,000. The doorman’s story was eventually proven to be untrue.

The next payment was to former Playboy model Karen McDougal, who claimed a romantic and sexual relationship with Trump. Colangelo alleged that Cohen asked AMI to buy the story. Colangelo said AMI paid McDougal $150,000 in exchange for "unlimited life rights" to her story.

There are a few legal problems with the prosecution's theory. First, non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are not illegal, and the underlying statute says that there has to be a conspiracy "to promote or prevent the election...by unlawful means."

Second, as Andrew McCarthy pointed out, there is nothing in the indictment about a scheme or conspiracy:

The grand jury did not accuse Trump of a 'scheme' — much less a conspiracy — in its indictment. This is a matter of Bragg using a 'Statement of Facts' he wrote in order to spin the grand jury’s indictment into a grand election-theft conspiracy that the grand jury did not actually charge.

I’ll repeat that because it bears noting: The grand jury did not accuse Trump of a “scheme” — much less a conspiracy — in its indictment. This is a matter of Bragg using a “Statement of Facts” he wrote in order to spin the grand jury’s indictment into a grand election-theft conspiracy that the grand jury did not actually charge.

Bragg cannot use the word conspiracy because a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime. It is not a crime to suppress damaging information — that is something politicians do all the time. Withholding information is only a crime when there is a legal obligation to divulge the information. Politicians, of course, are not legally required to divulge extramarital affairs in political campaigns.

Also, the statute of limitations on all misdemeanors in New York State is two years. I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV either, so I'm not entirely sure that the underlying crime for the falsification of business records charge has to be within the statute of limitations.

If this silly legal fairy tale somehow results in a conviction, all of the people involved in "catch-and-kill" related to the 2020 election, including the 51 former intelligence officials who lied about the origins of the Hunter Biden laptop story, those who arranged for the New York Post's story to be censored, and people who conspired to deplatform those who said anything negative about Joe Biden, better watch out.