Cultural Rejection, Part II: Trump Orders Newsom to End Male Intrusion in Female Sports

If Democrats and the New York Times really want to correct their “cultural rejection,” Donald Trump just handed them a golden opportunity. Will Gavin Newsom take it?

It’s not as if Newsom can’t recognize the moment. Ever since Donald Trump won election to a second term as president, Newsom has tied himself in knots to appeal more to the center. Newsom called the Democrat brand “toxic” two months ago, and posted a message on X that it was “[t]ime to break out of our echo chambers.” Bill Maher pointed out that California was Ground Zero for its toxicity and that Newsom himself was its poster boy, especially on their transgender policies:

Gavin Newsom’s 180 degree turn on trans competing in sports is truly ‘hard to believe’:
Maher: “This all sounds good, but Governor, you were the poster boy for all of this stuff.
California schools cannot be required to notify parents if their kids in school have changed their… pic.twitter.com/wZGrwPD6z8

— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) March 29, 2025

Earlier in the same month, Newsom had made headlines by agreeing that having biological males competing in female sports was “deeply unfair,” while refusing to lift a finger to stop it. Instead, Newsom told Charlie Kirk that a 2014 law — which Newsom had supported, a point he didn’t mention — forced schools to allow boys into girls’ competitions and spaces. Newsom hasn’t even proposed modifying the law, let alone asked the legislature to reconsider it altogether.

Well, now Newsom has his chance. In a Truth Social rant this morning, Trump threatened “Newscum” with a broad suspension of federal funding if the state of California didn’t comply with Title IX when it comes to sports competitions. Trump also ordered the authorities running the competition to bar the male from further competition:

California, under the leadership of Radical Left Democrat Gavin Newscum, continues to ILLEGALLY allow “MEN TO PLAY IN WOMEN’S SPORTS.” This week a transitioned Male athlete, at a major event, won “everything,” and is now qualified to compete in the “State Finals” next weekend. As a Male, he was a less than average competitor. As a Female, this transitioned person is practically unbeatable. THIS IS NOT FAIR, AND TOTALLY DEMEANING TO WOMEN AND GIRLS. Please be hereby advised that large scale Federal Funding will be held back, maybe permanently, if the Executive Order on this subject matter is not adhered to. The Governor, himself, said it is “UNFAIR.” I will speak to him today to find out which way he wants to go??? In the meantime I am ordering local authorities, if necessary, to not allow the transitioned person to compete in the State Finals. This is a totally ridiculous situation!!!

Let’s look at this two ways — politically first, then legally. In the political context, Trump stands on firm ground indeed. The same Harvard-Harris CAPS poll I cited in the previous post shows that American voters oppose males in female competitions and spaces by a nearly 2:1 margin, 66/34:

I didn’t mention that result in the previous post, because it was more directly relevant here. More generally, 63% want government policy based on biology rather than individualized gender choices. These are not close calls with the electorate, and the gap is wide enough that even California voters are likely to be inclined in the same direction. Gavin Newsom must think so too, since he has spent the last few months abandoning his previous ‘principles’ on transgender policy. At the very least, Newsom knows that California’s policies look radical and extreme to the rest of the country, even if his fellow Democrats remain in denial.

Politically, this is a brilliant tactic to put Newsom on the spot to take action that matches his new positions. If he does, Newsom will look like he’s caving to Trump. If he doesn’t, then Newsom will look like a greasy politician who’ll say anything to get elected. 

Well … even more so, I mean.

What about the legal aspect of this threat? Trump has no authority to order “local authorities” to do anything, obviously. It’s the kind of bluster that Trump likes to use, perhaps unseemingly so at times. Presidents have little authority over local functions for good reasons that have to do with the Tenth Amendment and the wisdom of the founders. 

However, Trump does have authority to enforce federal law, and generations of Democrats made sure presidents had that authority specific to Title IX, added in 1972 to the Civil Rights Act with the express purpose of protecting women in education. That has been used to force schools to protect women’s athletics by ensuring equal access to competition, and specifically to ensure females have an equal number of sports opportunities as males. For the past 50-plus years, presidents have used federal funding to enforce their interpretations of Title IX on states and schools. A federal court recently rejected Joe Biden’s attempt to neuter Title IX by interpreting it as applying to self-identified “gender,” and Trump reversed the policy almost immediately on taking office. 

The threat to order local officials to block biological males in women’s competition is an empty one. The threat to California’s access to the trough of federal education funding is not. Newsom and California can take Trump to court over it — Maine and Janet Mills already are doing so — but the power that Democrats invested in the executive branch to interpret and enforce Title IX is almost certain to prevail. That’s especially true given that Newsom’s policies (and Mills’ too) actively degrade female access to aspects of educational opportunities through athletic competition, the issue that prompted Congress to pass Title IX in the first place. 

Still, this comes down to Newsom rather than Trump. If allowing males to compete against females in female-only competition is “deeply unfair” as Newsom acknowledges, why wouldn’t he do something about it? Why hasn’t he done something about it? The answer to that question might be the first step in unlocking the “cultural rejection” that Democrats are experiencing. If they refuse to address it, they’d better be prepared for a long stay in the cultural and political wilderness.