Despite President Donald Trump’s threats and several investigations launched by his administration into Maine’s protections for transgender athletes, withholding federal money from schools is easier said than done.

Hours after a tense exchange between Trump and Gov. Janet Mills over the state’s policy regarding trans athletes, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) initiated an investigation into the Maine Department of Education and a southern Maine school district for failing to comply with its interpretation of federal law and an executive order barring trans girls from competing on sports teams consistent with their gender identity.

For decades, Title IX has been enforced almost exclusively by OCR, which upholds specific federal laws that protect students and employees at institutions receiving federal funds from discrimination based on race, sex or gender. These laws include Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 that protects against sex discrimination, as well as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that protects against racial discrimination.

Recently, the Trump administration has been advancing an alternative interpretation of these laws and has used OCR to threaten to cut federal funding to Democratic states (including California, Minnesota, and Maine) that have enshrined protections for trans students.

But OCR’s protocols, the actual text of federal law, and Maine’s state laws will together provide the state a substantial bulwark against possible funding cuts, an expert on the agency said.

“It’s not easy for OCR to legitimately cut off funding,” said Rachel Perera, a fellow in the governance studies program for the Brown Center on Education Policy at national think tank The Brookings Institution. “Repurposing OCR’s work to terminate federal funding for these more expansive interpretations of current federal law is going to be an uphill battle.”

Perera said cutting off federal funds to state education departments is almost unheard of for any reason, let alone an OCR violation. In fact, OCR has never withheld federal funds as a result of an investigation, according to Perera as well as an investigation by USA Today.

Although the Trump administration is interpreting Title IX to exclude trans athletes from sports and schools facilities, there is nothing in the actual law that mentions trans students. On top of that, OCR — an already overworked, understaffed department — has historically had limited authority as well as a significant backlog of cases to investigate, which Perera said makes any drastic outcome, such as withholding funds from Maine, highly unlikely.

All of that means that Maine is in a strong position to push back against the federal government, as long as current laws and procedures apply.

In heated exchange over trans rights, Gov. Mills tells President Trump: ‘See you in court’

“I think institutions, states and universities who want to stand up to them have the current interpretations of federal law on their side and current policies and regulations that dictate how OCR works on their side,” Perera said. “How much those things matter — as much as they have in the past — is still an open question.”

The Maine Department of Education agrees with that assessment.

“The Maine DOE does not believe that the federal government can legally withhold funding from Maine schools – either for athletic programming or more generally – as a means of coercion for compliance with an Executive Order,” said spokesperson Chloe Teboe in a statement.

In addition to the OCR investigation, the Trump administration expanded its probe into Maine through the departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services, which the Bangor Daily News reported had only each launched one previous Title IX investigation. The University of Maine System had not received the USDA letter as of Tuesday, according to system spokesperson Samantha Warren. The agency’s public statement announcing the investigation “notably makes no allegations of any wrongdoing,” Warren said.

OCR claims Maine in ‘irresolvable conflict’ with federal law

In a letter sent Friday to Maine Education Commissioner Pender Makin, OCR’s Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor said the agency plans to expeditiously investigate whether the state has been denying equal opportunities to female student athletes while having policies that allow “males to participate in girl’s interscholastic athletics, thereby depriving girls and young women of equal athletic opportunities.”

According to the Trump administration’s interpretation of Title IX, “a potential Title IX violation occurs when a covered entity denies female students female-only intimate facilities, such as sex-segregated locker rooms and bathrooms,” Trainor said.

OCR said Maine DOE might be knowingly defying federal law, citing the department’s response to Trump’s executive order asking schools to continue complying with Maine Human Rights Act, which protects trans students from discrimination in schools.

“OCR’s initiation of a directed investigation is not itself evidence of a violation of federal civil rights laws and regulations,” Trainor said. “However, MDOE’s posted statement … appears to acknowledge that it is knowingly taking a position in irresolvable conflict with federal law and instructing schools throughout Maine to do the same.”

The Cumberland-area school district that is under investigation is following Maine DOE’s guidance, according to a letter posted by Superintendent Jeff Porter on Feb. 10. OCR cited that letter and “credible local reporting” by the Maine Wire, a conservative blog published by the Maine Policy Institute, as reasons to investigate Greely High School.

What OCR can and can’t do

OCR investigates thousands of complaints each year, and they typically take months or years to resolve. In the course of its investigation, the office conducts interviews and reviews documents. If investigators find that a student or staff member was discriminated against, the office can require that districts make changes, such as altering policies, conducting staff or student training, or assessing school climate. These changes are often outlined in a voluntary resolution agreement. If the agency being investigated does not want to comply, it can get the Department of Justice involved, which can then result in the investigation being settled in federal court.

“So there’s lots of opportunities for institutions to forestall the possibility of having their federal funds terminated, and then to have the federal courts weigh in in a much more definitive manner,” Perera said.

Mills seems prepared for this route. In a statement issued in response to the OCR investigation on Friday, the governor said, “I imagine that the outcome of this politically directed investigation is all but predetermined. My administration will begin work with the attorney general to defend the interests of Maine people in the court of law.”

Like much of the federal government, OCR is currently in flux, with employees ordered not to investigate thousands of pending complaints alleging race and sex-based discriminations. Almost all OCR investigations were historically initiated due to complaints filed by agencies or individuals turning to the civil rights agency for help. But since Trump took office, those have taken a back seat and the office has pursued proactive “directed investigations,” ordered by the administration.

The Maine probe is an example of a directed investigation.

Title IX open to interpretation

The Trump administration dismantled former President Joe Biden’s expansion of Title IX to protect trans and gender nonconforming students, reverting to a 2020 version of the law that does not explicitly say anything about trans students and can’t be applied to exclude trans athletes from sports, Perera said.

“So I think they’re also out on a limb there, where they are interpreting the law in a way that doesn’t reflect the law, which gives Maine more opportunity to push back,” she said.

Rewriting Title IX would need approval from Congress, making it unlikely the law would be amended quick enough to allow OCR a clearer path to declare that Maine is guilty of sex-based discrimination, she said.

And while national law remains open to interpretation, Maine’s law is clear: trans rights are protected in schools and beyond by the Maine Human Rights Act. And Maine Attorney General Frey and Mills have promised to abide by the act and enforce those protections despite federal threats.

“Fortunately,” Frey said in a statement ahead of the investigation announcement, “the rule of law still applies in this country, and I will do everything in my power to defend Maine’s laws and block efforts by the president to bully and threaten us.”

Maine Morning Star is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maine Morning Star maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Lauren McCauley for questions: info@mainemorningstar.com.

Two religious schools from Maine argued in federal court on Tuesday against the state’s anti-discrimination law, which they say infringes on their constitutional right to free exercise of religion.

To what extent Maine can allow religious schools to follow their practices — many of which uphold traditional Christian values and can be inherently exclusionary to LGBTQ+ students or students practicing other religions — while protecting the rights of all students will be determined by federal judges in the coming months.

“Can a state that has an anti-discrimination law make that apply to everyone, or are religious organizations going to get an exemption from that?” asked Christopher Taub, Maine’s deputy attorney general who is representing the state in the trial.

“Most people, most taxpayers, would not want their funds to be used for purposes of discrimination. And so the question is, can states stop that from happening or not? And I think the decisions that we get in these cases might help answer that.”

Appellants say Supreme Court precedent protects against exclusion

Crosspoint Church, which runs Bangor Christian Schools, and St. Dominic Academy in Auburn appealed in separate cases heard back-to-back in the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston.

Citing several Supreme Court decisions, including one in 2022 that allowed religious schools to be eligible for public funds, they said the state’s educational nondiscrimination provisions create what they described as a “chilling effect,” that in effect exclude religious schools from a state program that allows private schools to receive public education funding in cases where mostly rural students without a local public school can opt in to another school or district.

“The First Amendment actually does protect religious organizations from the very activity that the state of Maine is trying to impose upon them,” said Jeremy Dys, attorney for Crosspoint Church from the First Liberty Institute, a national religious freedom organization. “What we want is not to be penalized for the exercise of religious beliefs.”

Both appellants asked for a reversal of a 2024 U.S. District Court decision to allow Maine to apply its Human Rights Act — which prohibits discrimination on the basis of protected classes, including race, color, sex, sexual orientation (which includes gender identity and expression), among other categories — to all K-12 private schools accepting public funds.

Neither school has applied for the program because they said doing so would allow the state to scrutinize their religious practices.

For example, under the Maine Human Rights Act, Bangor Christian Schools’ practice of not admitting gay or trans students, or expelling students for premarital sex, would violate the law. For St. Dominic’s, it would mean if a student who refuses to pray three times a day or attend mass is denied admission, that student could seek protection by filing a complaint with the Maine Human Rights Commission. Also, teachers wouldn’t be able to say that their faith does not allow them to use students’ preferred pronouns, or they risk being investigated under the Maine Human Rights Act, according to Adele Keim from Becket, the law firm representing St. Dominic’s that fights religious liberty cases.

“Non-discrimination law is important for everybody,” she said. “But as important as it is, it can’t be used to deprive religious believers of their rights.”

If the appeals court does not rule in favor of the religious schools, Dys said the case may have to return to the U.S. Supreme Court, which currently has a conservative majority, “if that’s what it takes to make sure that these religious organizations are treated fairly and equitably.”

State argues cases are premature

The state of Maine argued Tuesday that the cases are premature, since neither religious school that appealed has yet applied for funding and so does not know exactly how Maine’s anti-discrimination law would impact their practices.

It is also possible to comply with state law as a religious school, Taub said, as evidenced by Cheverus High School in Portland, which has been approved to accept public funds for students for years, and has not had to face any complaints or investigations.

One of the arguments appellants focused on was the general applicability of the law, which came under question since Maine also allows rural students to choose out-of-state private schools, which Keim pointed out don’t have to adhere to Maine’s Human Rights Act.

However, out of the 4,500 students statewide that use the tuition reimbursement program, only two go to out-of-state schools, Taub said. Since Maine does not have jurisdiction over other states, it can’t apply its nondiscrimination law to those institutions that receive tuition from Maine municipalities, regardless of whether those schools are religious.

Finally, it is possible to strike down part of the Maine Human Rights Act that could be seen as stifling religious freedom without allowing religious schools to be completely exempt from following the law, Taub said. That would mean religious schools can reject students based on whether or not they align with the school’s beliefs, but they would not be able to reject a student on the basis of sexual orientation or gender, for example.

“This particular provision that talks about allowing religious expression, if the court thinks that’s problematic, instead of breaking down everything, it could just strike down that one provision,” Taub said.

Maine Morning Star is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maine Morning Star maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Lauren McCauley for questions: info@mainemorningstar.com.

Some Democratic lawmakers and community leaders in Maine’s Second District are disappointed in Congressman Jared Golden’s stance on President Donald Trump’s potential re-election, which they say dismisses threats to their rights and communities and does not reflect the values of the Democratic Party.

In an op-ed in the Bangor Daily News last week, the Second District Democrat predicted a Trump victory in November and argued Congress would provide a sufficient bulwark against his administration.

“While I don’t plan to vote for him, Donald Trump is going to win. And I’m OK with that,” he wrote.

Gia Drew, executive director of the statewide LGBTQ+ rights organization Equality Maine, said it’s irresponsible for Golden “to talk about Trump in this way, or even to diminish how negatively impactful another Trump administration would be on so many different communities, which include folks here in Maine.”

Drew, who is among the delegates elected to represent Maine at the Democratic National Convention next month, said she doesn’t think the editorial reflects “the true values of most Mainers and definitely not the true values of most Democrats.”

Drew and other leaders said they believed Golden minimized how much a second Trump presidency could threaten reproductive, immigrant and LGBTQ+ rights, as well as public education and health care.

Since President Joe Biden’s much-criticized debate performance last month, he has faced questions about his capacity to govern as well as his ability to successfully campaign against Trump. While most Democratic lawmakers on the federal and state level have coalesced behind the president in recent days, many voters remain concerned about the prospects of a second Trump presidency.

Alternately, Golden said he rejects the premise that a second Trump term would present “a unique threat to our democracy.” Pointing to previous examples of congressional action that happened “in spite of the president, not because of him,” he argues that the members of Congress, citizens and other institutions can hold the president accountable and defend democracy.

Citing stakes of election, Maine’s Democratic delegates defend support for Biden

“Pearl-clutching about a Trump victory ignores the strength of our democracy,” Golden wrote.

In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for the Golden campaign said that while the presidential election is important, it is Congress that holds lawmaking power.

“Republican leaders in Congress want to cut Medicare and Social Security, roll back health care, and pass nationwide bans on abortion and IVF,” the spokesperson said. “The presidential election matters, but it’s Congress that writes laws and Congress that can provide a strong check on an executive who moves against the national interest.”

Amy Roeder, a state representative from Bangor, said Golden overstates the power of checks and balances that he argued would temper Trump’s impact, particularly given how recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions have weakened the power of the executive branch.

“What I found a little bit naive in the op-ed is that he believed checks and balances would keep former President Trump in line should he win another election,” she said.

“Well, they never did before, and he has told us that on day one of his presidency, he’d established himself as a dictator,” Roeder added.

Drew also noted that under the Trump administration, several anti-LGBTQ+ policies were passed — for example, restrictions on transgender people in the military accessing gender affirming care — and Golden’s argument disregards the safety and well-being of LGBTQ+ people.

“If a former president is not good for human rights, which includes LGBTQ rights, and if you start to align yourself with that person, you’re no longer for human rights or LGBTQ rights,” she said.

Pamela Proulx-Curry, executive director of the Maine MultiCultural Center in Bangor, told Maine Morning Star that Golden’s perspective neglects to consider the state’s immigrant communities.

“With all due respect to Congressman Golden, I believe that he is seriously mistaken on this issue,” Proulx-Curry said, citing Trump’s record on immigration issues during his presidency and his connection to authors of Project 2025, a transition plan spearheaded by the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation that includes policies such as mass deportation and the construction of a border wall.

“Trump’s own words during his current campaign make it very clear that immigrant rights would indeed be endangered by another Trump administration,” Proulx-Curry said.

Roeder said her Democratic constituents have expressed disappointment when Golden votes against policies that they care about and she worries the op-ed may further alienate those voters.

“Democrats in CD2 don’t want to feel abandoned just because it’s a red area with pockets of blue,” she said. “If I could, I’d implore Golden to talk to CD2 Dems and really listen to who they are and what they want.”

Golden — who is running for re-election in one of the most competitive U.S. House races in the country against Republican state Rep. Austin Theriault — has often bucked the Democratic establishment and embraced his reputation as a party outsider.

When asked about a closed door discussion Tuesday on Biden’s candidacy, Golden spokesperson Mario Moretto told the Portland Press Herald that he hadn’t attended a Democratic caucus meeting since October 2021.

“As the most independent member of his party in the House, Congressman Golden has little need to attend Democratic caucus meetings,” Moretto said.

To Laurie Osher, a Democratic state representative from Orono, Golden’s statement is not entirely surprising because of his record of not voting along party lines.

“He’s been walking a tightrope trying to keep his seat in a tough district and I hope he continues to keep his seat,” Osher said. “He’s still going to vote with the Democrats more than any Republican would, and therefore he is my candidate.”

Osher said she thinks the commentary was intended to sway Republican voters. Decision Desk HQ estimates that Trump has a 94% chance of winning Maine’s Second District, which means that Golden needs to secure the votes of at least some Trump supporters to retain his seat.

“I think it was just Jared Golden trying to calculate his way to get more Republican votes,” she said of the op-ed.

“I don’t know if he actually believes he’ll be fine if Trump wins.”

Maine Morning Star is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maine Morning Star maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Lauren McCauley for questions: info@mainemorningstar.com. Follow Maine Morning Star on Facebook and X.