The University of Pennsylvania recently committed to a controversial agreement with the Trump administration which will bar transgender athletes from competing on women’s sports teams.
Penn, as the alma mater of former President Trump, is the first institution to enter such an agreement. This follows an investigation by the Department of Education’s Civil Rights Office (OCR) which concluded that the university had violated Title IX—federal legislation that prohibits sex discrimination in educational settings—by permitting a transgender athlete to join the women’s swimming team during the 2021-22 season.
Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas broke three records in women’s individual freestyle events that season, but those achievements were removed from the record books as part of the agreement. The records were documented by the university, showing that Thomas excelled in the 100, 200, and 500 freestyle races.
The agreement mandated that Penn place a clear statement on its website regarding Title IX compliance, specifically banning transgender girls from participating in girls’ sports and restricting transgender women from engaging in women’s athletics altogether.
The university took steps to formally apologize to Thomas’s former teammates and subsequently adopted a definition of “male” and “female” based on biological criteria.
The NCAA, which oversees sports for over 1,000 colleges, also moved to restrict trans women from competing in women’s sports shortly after Trump signed the directive. NCAA president Charlie Baker testified that there are fewer than ten transgender athletes currently in the organization.
Siwali Patel, director of the National Center for Women’s Law, criticized the Trump administration’s approach. She argued that the resolution contracts should not be legitimized, expressing concern about the broader implications for sports policies.
In a letter to the Penn community, J. Larry Jameson, the university’s leadership, affirmed a commitment to a welcoming atmosphere for all students while acknowledging the constraint of federal law and NCAA eligibility standards. He noted that Penn previously lacked a specific policy for trans student-athletes, suggesting compliance with the regulations was essential.
However, the administration suspended a $175 million federal contract with Penn earlier this year, citing Thomas’s previous participation on the women’s team. Officials indicated that this funding would be reinstated following the agreement’s signing.
Patel voiced her worries about the agreement potentially influencing decisions at other institutions, suggesting it could encourage a wave of similar policies across schools. She fears that these actions might make it easier for the Trump administration to pursue aggressive measures against transgender individuals in sports.
Since Trump’s inauguration, over 20 federal investigations have targeted schools and districts accused of violating Title IX regarding transgender athlete participation. The Department of Health and Human Services has launched its own investigation, and legal actions have been initiated in several states, including a lawsuit against California’s Department of Education concerning its treatment of transgender students.
While many universities are facing threats to federal funding, Penn stands out as the sole institution to have suspended funds over transgender athlete issues. Other schools are less willing to challenge the administration, potentially leading to a hesitance to support trans students out of fear of losing financial backing.
Throughout the nation, 27 states led by Republican legislators have enacted laws that bar transgender students from competing according to their gender identity. Legal challenges to these laws are underway, with varied outcomes seen in states like Arizona and West Virginia.
The Supreme Court is set to consider whether state laws prohibiting transgender athletes from participating on gender-specific teams violate Title IX and the 14th Amendment. In a related ruling, the court recently affirmed that Tennessee’s law restricting gender-affirming care for minors does not constitute discrimination against transgender individuals.
