Minnesota Lawsuit Advances Shockingly Poor Attacks on Title IX
Can executive orders meant to protect women’s spaces and opportunities violate a law protecting women’s spaces and opportunities?
That’s what Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison alleged in a Tuesday lawsuit to stop the enforcement of “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” an executive order that defines sex as biological and binary, and “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” another order preventing the government from funding educational organizations that allow boys to play in girls sports.
Ellison contends the orders violate state sovereignty and, ironically, Title IX — the federal statute forbidding sex discrimination in education.
The suit is Ellison’s answer to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s insinuation that the Department of Justice (DOJ) could soon sue Minnesota for violating Title IX.
Investigative journalist and conservative commentator, Libs of Tik Tok, summarized the bizarre suit on X:
This author wishes she could disagree.
The dispute boils down to warring interpretations of Title IX.
For decades, this statute prevented discrimination against women based on sex (as it was intended). But, between 2021 and 2024, the federal government advanced two new “reinterpretations” of Title IX expanding the definition of sex to include “gender identity” — a person’s internal sense of being male or female.
The Department of Education (DOE) withdrew one problematic reinterpretation last December and no less than four federal courts halted the enforcement of the other. The disputed executive orders restore the original intent and power of the statute after years of confusion.
But Minnesota is one of at least four states continuing to treat “gender identity” as a protected class under Title IX — flatly refusing to prevent boys from participating in girls sports and accessing girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms.
The DOJ sued Maine, another of these defiant states, on April 17 for violating Title IX and failing to uphold the president’s orders. If the DOJ wins, the federal government could withhold crucial funding to Maine.
Ellison’s 30-page suit filed in Minnesota District Court argues “Defending Women” and “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” violates Title IX because the statute protects “gender identity.”
This is patently false. Per the filing, Title IX reads,
This wording has never changed. All reinterpretations of Title IX trying to include gender identity as a protected category have either been rescinded or legally halted.
Ellison ignores these facts, arguing instead that Title IX does not explicitly define sex as biological, which means it could feasibly include “gender identity.” Further, the suit claims, Title IX does not explicitly require states to keep trans-identified men out of women’s sports and spaces.
This is a false dichotomy. Title IX’s failure to explicitly address “gender identity” does not prove the authors wanted to allow gender confused men into women’s sports and spaces. It’s far more likely they had no idea sex would one day become such an ambiguous term.
Ellison cites several court cases to shore up his position, including the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock, which redefined sex in the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation and “gender identity.”
The suit conveniently omits a ruling from the District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi finding Bostock does not apply to Title IX because the Supreme Court specifically clarified the Bostock ruling did not apply to any other sex discrimination laws.
The Southern District of Mississippi is one of several courts to affirm that “sex” in Title IX refers to biological sex. In Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals wrote:
In a ruling halting one of the government’s “redefinitions” of Title IX, the District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky wrote:
In a similar case, the District Court for the Northern District of Texas determined that, at the time of Title IX’s creation,
Ellison is perhaps the last person who should weigh in on definitions of sex. In another objection to “Defending Women,” the case reads,
What are these crazy definitions, you ask?
- “Sex” shall refer to an individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female. “Sex” is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of gender identity.
- “Female” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell.
- “Male” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell.
- “Gender identity” reflects a fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality and sex and existing on an infinite continuum, that does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex.”
Call me crazy, but “Defending Women” defines basic biology far better than any of the redefinitions Ellison appears to favor.
Ellison’s bizarre, false portrayal of Title IX — and biology — are part of his attempt to unilaterally redefine sex in Minnesota.
The suit cites a portion of the Tenth Amendment giving state attorneys general the right to “issue formal opinions on significant issues of state law.”
In February 2025, Ellison issued an opinion declaring that Minnesota’s Declaration of Human Rights —which protects against discrimination based on “gender identity” — supersedes the president’s executive orders.
Ellison argues this is a legitimate exercise of state sovereignty and should not affect the money Minnesota receives from the federal government.
In short, Ellison wants federal funds without following federal law.
This author’s not sure how that argument will play in court.
Lawsuits can reveal astonishingly clear pictures of legislators and politicians’ beliefs. If Ellison’s views truthfully represent his view of the world … holy cannoli. Please pray for the people of Minnesota.
And, as always, remember to do your research.
Additional Articles and Resources
Attorney General pam Bondi Sues Maine for Title IX Violations
CNN Demonstrates Logical Incoherence in Contemporary Gender Theory
Department of Education Launches Multiple Investigations Into Title IX Violations
Department of Justice Launches Title IX Task Force to Protect Women’s Sports
Five Terrible, No-Good, Fatal Flaws of Gender Theory
Maine Schools Violated Title IX, Must Apologize, Feds Say
On 50th Anniversary of Title IX, Groups Fight to Protect Women’s Sports
Poll Finds Majority of Americans Want Transgender Athletes to Play on Team of Birth Sex
Trump Signs Executive Order Protecting Women’s Sports and Spaces
President Trump: ‘There are Only Two Genders: Male and Female’
Victory for Girls Sports: Court Halts DOE Redefinition of Sex
Second Federal Court Halts DOE’s Title IX Rewrite – Protecting Girls’ Sports & Spaces
Third Court Halts DOE’s Title IX Rewrite, Girls’ Sports & Spaces Preserved
Courts Defend Title IX from Department of Health and Human Services
Huge Win for Title IX: Department of Education’s 2021 Interpretation Ruled Unlawful
