His Department of Education, a misnomer if ever there was one (especially in light of who he chose as his Secretary of Education), has apparently opened an investigation into whether or not Smith College has violated Title IX by admitting transgender women.
Smith College is a private women’s college of some repute located in Massachusetts. The school has admitted transgender women since 2015, stating that "any applicants who self-identify as women; cis, trans, and nonbinary women" are eligible to apply to the school. Smith is one of only 30 women’s colleges left in the United States according to the Women’s College Coalition. The Trump administration is claiming that Title IX contains an exception that allows colleges to be all-male or all-female, but it only applies "on the basis of biological sex difference, not subjective gender identity." They also claim in a press release, that Smith has been "admitting biological men." The release quotes Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey as saying, "An all-women's college loses all meaning if it is admitting biological males. Allowing biological males into spaces designed for women raises serious concerns about privacy, fairness, and compliance under federal law. The Trump Administration will continue to uphold the law and fight to restore common sense."
The investigation into Smith College stems from a complaint filed with the Office of Civil Rights in June 2025 by the conservative legal group Defending Education.
"DE and its members oppose, among other things, discrimination on the basis of sex in America's K-12 schools and institutions of higher education," the organization said in a news release.
So once again, some ultra-conservative group is attacking both a private institution and the entire transgender community simply out of fear, ignorance, and prejudice. Just who is being hurt by Smith College admitting transgender women? Absolutely no one!
Comments
They've weaponized every branch + department of government
8647
for the axe had convinced them that because his handle
was made of wood he was one of them.
I thought they trashed the Dept of Education?
Gutted it along with other agencies. Last year with DOGE and incompetence!
Asst. Secretary for Civil Rights??
This is truly the world of "1984", where every truth is inverted. This woman is destroying Civil Rights.
Isn't this the woman who ...
... confused AI (ie artificial intelligence) with the term A1 (ie top class) in a discussion I saw on (IIRC) YouTube? She didn't seem to know much about education. But then, for some time I've been trying to shake off the habit of doom scrolling YT videos of the US president's behaviour, so I may be wrong.
Change it to Republicans
The title needs to be changed from Trump to Republicans. He is the leader of the party and they are going along with his policies. When he is gone, the Republicans in government are not going to do anything to change most if not all of his policies. Here is a great example of the party going along with his policies. When he settled the suit against TicketMaster, not one Republican State AG joined the group of state AG who filed their own suit against TicketMaster.
Not all Republicans agree with or go along with Trump……..
Although it appears that the vast majority of those in Congress bend the knee to him, that is not true of ALL Republicans. Look up The Lincoln Project some time.
As a matter of fact, I am a registered Republican. I am a fiscal conservative and believe in small government - the main reasons I registered as a Republican at the age of 18. The last Republican I voted for in a presidential election was Mitt Romney, and I often vote for non-Republican candidates. Unlike many of the lemmings in both major parties, I vote my conscience and vote for the person that I feel is most qualified and will do the best job for the people. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the Republican candidate in most cases of late.
Socially, I am far to the left of most Republicans - but not all are right wing assholes either. I am actually much more middle of the road on most things, and probably fit the Libertarian mold.
To be completely honest, the only reasons I have not changed my voter registration are that a) as a Republican I can still vote in the party primaries and hopefully keep the Trumpers from being selected, and b) as my spouse was a member of the local government (which is dominated by Democrats) she was repeatedly pressured to not only change her party affiliation (she is an Independent), but also to attend Democratic Party functions and donate money to the party. EVEN THOUGH SHE WASN’T AN ELECTED OFFICIAL. The Democrats pressured her by threatening her job every four years when the election cycle came around.
And many of those Democrats had some very nasty things to say about both me, and her, when I came out publicly and transitioned. They are not exactly the progressive spotlights of the community.
The point being is that the Democrats are no better; they did exactly what you are accusing the Republicans of doing. You should keep in mind that not everyone is like that, but all it takes is enough to give the impression to people that they all act alike.
D. Eden
“Hier stehe ich; ich kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir.”
Dum Vivimus, Vivamus
You and I have a lot in common politically.
As a young voter, I registered as a Democrat because my father was a Democrat. But then along came Reagan. I liked what he did in his first term and changed my registration to Republican to help get the right kind of congress elected to help him do more good.
I've not changed my affiliation in all these years because of the very reasons you cited; fiscal conservatism and small government. I too vote my conscience and want to be able to participate in choosing the candidates on the ballot.
I used to bill myself as a far-right wing conservative Republican. But now find myself having moved to the moderated area. Perhaps it's not I that moved left (I haven't changed my views) but the scale that has move to the right.
Hugs
Patricia
Happiness is being all dressed up and HAVING some place to go.
Semper in femineo gerunt
Ich bin ein femininer Mann
Its a given when talking about the implementation of policies...
It's a given when talking about the implementation of policies and what is going on by the politicians; one is talking about the party and its leadership. If not, people would have to be so pandantic when talking about politics.
In my post I am talking about the Republican Party leadership that has those policies. When talking about implementing policies, people are talking about the party leadership not the voters. If I talked about the Democratic policies on abortion. Most people would not think I was talking about every single democratic voter when I said it is a pro-choice party. I should have been more precise. I said the party and the Republicans in government to show I was talking about leadership. I DID NOT SAY ALL REPUBLICANS.
.
I do not need to look up the Lincoln Project. I have known about them since they were founded in 2019. I have watched clips and read opinion pieces by George Conway, Steve Schmidt, Rich Wilson, and Jennifer Wilson. The Lincoln Project’s main issues with Trump are his corruption, boorish behavior, and his unconstitutional acts. They do not bring up being in disagreement with his policies.
Here is a perfect example of what is considered an anti-Trump Republican politician. Liz Cheney voted with Trump 95% of the time and she is labeled as being anti-Trump.
Those small-minded local officials who said nasty comments about you and your wife are horrible people. That does make the Democrats just the same as Republicans on Transrights. This is because the party does not run on limiting Transrights. The Republican Party does. I have a ton of issues with the Democratic Party, but with dealing with human rights they are not the same as Republicans. They have better civil rights policies than the Republican Party does. That is a fact.
Just a couple of days ago, in Pennsylvania, not one Republican Rep voted for a bill that aimed to close legal loopholes that would allow whites-only housing communities in the state. The bill also protects sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. The bill would close a Fair Housing Act loophole allowing private clubs to limit occupancy to members, which the bill aims to close. There is already a club in Arkansas that is using that loophole.
Inevitable
Attacking the trans community is one of the things that reliably unites almost all of the Trump coalition, and divides the Democratic coalition, so they will not stop. When they discharged trans members of the armed forces — probably the most sympathetic group you could imagine — and got next to no push-back, it was clear that there would be no limits to their attacks. They will find every possible way to come for us.
— Emma
Unfortunately, you are very correct.
We can only hope that Trump’s other blunders with cause enough economic pain - not to mention his ongoing military adventures - to result in the average voter revolting against him and his group. Should that happen, then hopefully the pendulum will begin swinging back the opposite direction.
We are akin to the Jews of Nazi Germany - a convenient scapegoat which can be blamed for all of the ills of our society and used to drum up the party faithful while distracting from all of the real issues. Since mass deportations don’t seem to be as popular as they were, the focus is being shifted from immigrants to us. And once again, the minuscule real world impact of the transgender student population is becoming the focal point for hate.
D. Eden
“Hier stehe ich; ich kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir.”
Dum Vivimus, Vivamus
The average voter revolting against him
I've heard more than one person who had supported Trump in the last election, say they are sorry they ever voted for him.
I firmly believe there's going to be a serious backlash this mid-term election.
Hugs
Patricia
Happiness is being all dressed up and HAVING some place to go.
Semper in femineo gerunt
Ich bin ein femininer Mann
Fiscal Conservatism?
If my facts are correct Clinton reduced the USA's indebtedness and so did Obama. It increased under Reagan, both Bushes and now Trump, with an enormous increase to date.
Small government has been achieved by cutting services in Red states, like restricting access to abortion rights and disenfranchising us the transgendered.
Tell me I'm wrong.
While I would love to see a total rejection of Trump and his toady cronies, a week is a long time in politics and the memories of voters are short. When the price of gasoline and diesel comes down the swing may decrease.
Color me cynical.
Clinton did reduce the debt,
Clinton did reduce the debt, Obama only reduced the deficit. The last Republican President who balanced the budget was Eisenhower. In many ways he was a RINO. He was pro-union, did not call for cutting taxes, embraced New Deal programs, such as expanding Social Security and supporting moderate social welfare, and he was not an isolationist.
It is the constant messaging of the Republican Party that they are fiscal conservatives. The media does not push back on that narrative. If they were truly fiscal conservatives, they would not have slashed the budget of the IRS. These slashes made the government lose so much on tax collections by not being able to aduit tax returns. They would use the simple solution of not capping FICA payroll tax to make Social Security solvent.
It is also the constant messaging of the Republican Party that they are for smaller government and there is no push back from the media, which makes people believe that. They are only "small government" when it comes to regulations on businesses and taxes for the upper class.
To be clear this is about the Republican party. Talking about the party and its policy is not talking about any radom republican voter. I know people in the republican party who are in it for an issue and not for all their policies.