Posts by Newspaper Staff

The Oregon Department of Education has been under investigation by the U.S. Education Department over an alleged violation of Title IX protections for allowing transgender athletes to compete in female sports.
Since March, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has launched multiple investigations into various states over Title IX violations for allowing males in female sports and intimate spaces.
California, a state that was found in violation of Title IX, is currently facing legal battles from the Department of Justice for not complying.
Craig Trainor, acting U.S. assistant secretary for civil rights, explained the Trump administration has been steadfast in its commitment to protecting women’s rights and that the Office for Civil Rights will use every lawful means to ensure female athletes are not denied equal opportunities.
“We will not allow the Portland Public Schools District (in Oregon) or any other educational entity that receives federal funds to trample on the anti-discrimination protections that women and girls are guaranteed under law,” said Trainor.
The OCR launched its investigation after receiving a civil rights complaint back in May by Leigh Ann O’Neill, the chief of staff for the Center for Litigation at the America First Policy Institute. The complaint blamed the Oregon Department of Education and the Oregon School Activities Association for allegedly allowing a transgender athlete to compete in girls track and field.
“AFPI has requested that the Office for Civil Rights investigate the ODE and OSAA, issue findings, and take all necessary action to bring Oregon’s K–12 athletics programs into compliance with federal law,” the AFPI statement said.
The civil rights office said it sent letters to Kimberly Armstrong, the superintendent of Portland Public Schools, and the OSAA informing them of the investigation.
Created in collaboration with the ODE, the OSAA states its gender identity participation policy “promotes harmony and fair competition among member schools by maintaining equality of eligibility” and allows all students a chance to participate in interscholastic activities.
“I stand firm in our legal responsibilities, and I deeply value every student’s right to be treated with dignity, safety, and respect,” said Armstrong. She noted this is a “complex legal landscape.”
The AFPI complaint noted a trans runner, Ada Gallagher from McDaniel High School in Northeast Portland, had won two female races, the 200-meter and 400-meter.
“Title IX was enacted to protect girls from this specific form of institutional discrimination now occurring in Oregon’s schools and athletic competitions,” the complaint concluded. “The Department of Education must take decisive action to end this unlawful practice and restore fairness, equality, and integrity to girls’ athletics in Oregon.”

Tension filled the room at the U.S. House Agriculture Committee hearing Wednesday morning as representatives debated the ramifications of California’s Proposition 12 on farmers and consumers nationwide.
The committee discussed the proposition’s national effects on the cost of pork, veal and eggs and agricultural production. The hearing comes after the Trump administration sued California for its regulations of eggs, claiming three state laws — Prop. 12 included — are contributing to the increase in prices.
Under Prop. 12, farmers nationwide face requirements for raising pigs, calves and chickens if they want to sell their products in California. The initiative was approved by voters in 2018 and went into full effect in 2024.
During the hearing, various Agriculture Committee members voiced opposition and support for Proposition 12.
Opponents on the panel claimed the law is raising prices nationwide because farmers in other states are spending money to rebuild their facilities to meet Prop. 12 standards. They also argue the state law has not achieved its main purpose: protecting animals’ health.
“When I visited family farms in my district, they noted that the system has caused increased stress, injury for the animal, mortality, while limiting individualized animal care,” U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Indiana, said during the hearing.
Matt Schuiteman, a farmer and a board member at the Iowa Farm Bureau, told the House committee that Prop. 12 forces farmers to care for their animals in a way that leaves them worse off. He noted farmers have first-hand knowledge that the politicians who crafted the initiative lacked.
“What Proposition 12 does is it takes away our ability to act on what we know is for the best interest of the animal,” Schuiteman said. “Maybe it has been settled in other places, but it has not been settled in Iowa, and we would prefer to have the freedom to manage our animals the best way we can see fit, for the best possible outcome.”
The Center for Environment and Welfare, a private think tank involved with animal welfare and environmental issues, told The Center Square Wednesday it agreed with claims accusing Prop. 12 of harming animals.
“The animal activists say Proposition 12 would be better for the animals, but that’s not necessarily true in all cases,” William Coggin, the center’s research director, said. “It has taken tools away from farmers and veterinarians.”
U.S. Rep. Jim Costa, D-California, who supports Proposition 12, blamed tariffs and other elements for raising prices.
“Tariffs are a tax on American consumers, American producers, American agricultural producers, and that leads to higher food costs,” Costa said during the hearing.
Supporters of Proposition 12 noted the initiative was passed by California voters. Therefore, they said, if Congress tried to overrule the law by passing its own bill, that would interfere with the will of the people.
The Center for Environment and Welfare, however, released a poll that showed 44% of California voters, a plurality, said they would not vote for Proposition 12 if it were on the ballot tomorrow. A majority of the poll’s respondents — 60% — said they supportied the state Legislature modifying Prop. 12 to reduce prices. The survey polled 458 registered voters.
Farm Action Fund, a nonpartisan organization, supports Proposition 12 and sent a letter to the House Agriculture Committee Wednesday, thanking members who support the initiative and urging the panel to reject efforts to overturn it. The letter was signed by independent hog farmers from a Farm Action Fund network.
Farmers made a choice to comply with Prop. 12, Joe Maxwell, the president of Farm Action Fund, told The Center Square Wednesday
“Proposition 12 did not mandate a Missouri farmer, or an Illinois farmer, or an Iowa farmer, to comply,” Maxwell said. “It just said if your pork is going to be sold in California, it must comply. Farmers that voluntarily wanted to comply, spent the money to do so.”
The Center for Environment and Welfare, on the other hand, said it believes California has the right to pass regulations only affecting farmers in California, not those in other states.
Patrick Hord, vice president of the National Pork Producers Council, testified at the hearing that it was not a viable or wise decision for states to not supply pork to California. The state produces only 0.1% of the nation’s pork, but consumes 13%.
Therefore, producers in other states must sell pork in California to meet the demand, Hord said.
“It would be really detrimental to us as pork producers and the pork chain to not supply that,” Hord said during the hearing. “In reality, it’s forcing the rest of the states to comply in order to raise that product for California.”

The Department of Justice will remain laser-focused on combating actions it believes violate civil rights laws, including initiatives promoting diversity, equity and inclusion.
That plan includes using subpoenas, prosecutions or revocation of federal funding, DOJ Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a civil rights and DEI-focused Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday.
“The goal is clear — either DEI will end on its own, or we will kill it,” Dhillon told lawmakers, arguing that DEI, by pushing for equity-based outcomes rather than individual rights and opportunity, is “a form of group justice that is a Marxist concept” and equates to “invidious racial discrimination.”
Under the second Trump administration, the 368 attorneys have left the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, which enforces federal statutes protecting Americans’ constitutional right to nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, class or religion.
But despite widespread agency cuts, the DOJ, Department of Education, Department of Homeland Security and other agencies have remained busy enforcing President Donald Trump’s civil rights agenda.
During Trump’s first six months in office, the administration has cut nearly all DEI-based federal contracts, frozen federal funding for higher education institutions that enable antisemitism or promote “woke” initiatives, redirected DEI-related funding for Smithsonian museums, and taken actions to ban transgender-identifying men from competing in women’s sports.
Dhillon said the DOJ is “taking our guidance from the priorities of this administration and the obvious violations that are occurring” by cracking down on any schools, businesses, and government programs that violate equal treatment under the law through affirmative action, social justice initiatives or other discrimination.
“Our responsibility toward the taxpayers requires us to focus on those big-ticket items, but we are also looking at offenders up and down the spectrum,” Dhillon added.
She referenced activities such as schools offering minority-only scholarships, admissions and hiring quotas, legal attacks on religious business owners, and minority-only taxpayer-funded grants as instances of “illegal discrimination.”
Rep. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., praised Dhillon and the Trump administration for their recent actions, calling DEI an “illegal,” “fraudulent” and “cynical” ideology.
“For at least the last decade, America’s civil rights laws have been used not to prohibit discrimination, but to institutionalize it,” Schmitt said. “The modern civil rights machine, both inside and outside the government, has been wielded like a weapon.”
Democratic lawmakers, however, reversed the accusation, arguing that the Trump administration has weaponized civil rights laws against things it dislikes, rather than actual violations.
“What you’re doing to use the sledgehammer of federal funding with universities to try to coerce them [in]to accepting your right-wing agenda is disgraceful, and using that cudgel will have far-reaching implications,” Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told Dhillon.
“Out of all the years of criticism of ‘cancel culture,’ you seem to want to cancel any institution that has views that you disagree with,” he added.