Connect with us

Northeast

HHS expands Title IX probe in Maine to include state association governing athletics, embattled high school

Published

on

HHS expands Title IX probe in Maine to include state association governing athletics, embattled high school

FIRST ON FOX: The Trump administration expanded its Title IX investigation into Maine, citing violations of the president’s executive order mandating that educational and athletic institutions bar biological males from competing in women’s sports.

The Maine Principals Association, the state’s primary governing body for high school athletics, and Greely High School, which has been a centerpiece in the debate over transgender sports participation in Maine, are both now being added to the list of Maine entities the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department is investigating over alleged Title IX violations, according to an HHS spokesperson. The department’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) launched an investigation into the Maine Department of Education (MDOE) last month, “based on information that Maine intends to defy” President Donald Trump’s order to keep biological males out of women’s sports. Four days later, the agency issued MDOE a “Notice of Violation.”  

“HHS will investigate and enforce Title IX to the full extent permitted by law to uphold fairness, safety, dignity, and biological truth in women’s and girls’ educational athletic opportunities,” Andrew Nixon, a department spokesperson, told Fox News Digital. “Men have no place in women’s sports. Maine must comply with Title IX or risk losing federal funding.”

MAINE GOP URGES DEMS TO REPEAL TRANSGENDER ATHLETE POLICY FOLLOWING FEDERAL TITLE IX VIOLATION FINDING

High school transgender athletes compete in the Connecticut girls Class S indoor track meet at Hillhouse High School in New Haven, Connecticut. The Trump administration is expanding its Title IX probe. ((AP Photo/Pat Eaton-Robb, File))

Advertisement

Republican state legislators in Maine called on Democratic Gov. Janet Mills on Thursday to stand down her open defiance of Trump’s Feb. 5 transgender sports executive order, which threatens hundreds of millions in federal funding to K-12 schools in the state, according to numbers obtained by the Portland Press Herald. MDOE received nearly a million dollars from HHS sub-agencies alone, Maine House Republicans said in a press release Thursday.

“Enough is enough, it is time to put away radical ideology and put the future of our kids first,” said Assistant House Minority Leader Katrina Smith, R–Palermo. “The Mills administration’s policy of allowing biological boys in girls’ sports has physically and mentally mistreated our young ladies and now this same policy will harm every child and teacher with the loss of federal funds to our schools.” 

“If Maine Democrats continue to double down on allowing biological males to participate in girls’ sports, our students stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars of federal funding. Gov. [Janet] Mills and legislative Democrats have a renewed opportunity to do the right thing, to ensure restored funding and a fair and level playing field for Maine girls,” added state Rep. Laurel Libby, R–Bangor, Thursday. 

Last month, Libby was censured by Democrats in the Maine state legislature after posting on social media that a Greely High School pole vaulter, who competed as recently as June of last year as a biological male, won a statewide championship meet competing as a woman.

MAINE HOUSE SPEAKER DELETES X ACCOUNT AFTER CENSURING LAWMAKER OPPOSED TO TRANSGENDER ATHLETES IN GIRLS SPORTS

Advertisement

Libby was censured specifically for posting a picture of the high school athlete from Greely competing as a male, contrasted next to an image of the athlete winning the women’s pole-vaulting competition at Maine’s Class B state indoor championship meet in February. The athlete was a minor. 

Maine state Reps. Laurel Libby, R–Bangor, left, and Katrina Smith, R–Palermo, right, pleaded with Gov. Janet Mills to change her stance on transgender sports participation, fearing it will result in the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding. (Maine State Legislature/Fox News)

“State leaders have failed our female athletes and there needs to be repercussions for their neglect,” said Zoe, who competed in shot put at Maine’s Class B state indoor championship meet, told Fox News Digital.

Trump began calling out Maine for defying his executive order shortly after Libby began sounding the alarm about the transgender athlete at Greely High School winning a statewide girls’ track meet. During a public spat with Mills at the White House, Trump threatened the state’s funding unless they “clean that up,” to which Mills responded that she would “see [him] in court.”

HIDING KIDS ‘GENDER IDENTITY’ FROM PARENTS IS COMMON IN BLUE STATE FIGHTING TRUMP ON TRANS ISSUES: WATCHDOG

Advertisement

Sarah Perry, a civil rights attorney with extensive experience litigating Title IX issues, said she believes Maine would be unsuccessful in court on this matter for a variety of reasons.

In addition to federal law, Maine is also flouting directives from the Department of Education and previously established precedent from a slew of cases that overturned former President Joe Biden’s Title IX regulations allowing athletic eligibility to be determined by one’s preferred gender identity, according to Perry.

“Maine entered into a contract with the Department of Education, promising to follow that federal civil rights law. [Mills’] reliance on contrary state law will prove fatal to any continued recalcitrance,” Perry said.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills and President Donald Trump at the White House during a meeting with the nation’s governors last month. (Getty Images)

Mills and the Maine Principals Association (MPA) have argued that Trump’s executive order conflicts with existing state Human Rights law. The MPA said that, as a result, it would defer to state law, which allows athletic eligibility to be determined based on a person’s stated gender identity.

Advertisement

I’M A 3-SPORT HIGH SCHOOL FEMALE ATHLETE IN MAINE – I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO COMPETE AGAINST BIOLOGICAL MALES

Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey confirmed to The New York Times on Thursday that his office received a “Notice of Violation” indicating MDOE was in violation of federal Title IX law as a result of its continued decision to allow athletic eligibility to be determined by gender-identity. 

The letter arrived four days after HHS announced its Title IX investigation into MDOE on Feb. 21. Mills’ office told local outlet the Bangor Daily News that her staff had not been questioned by federal investigators prior to the violation notice being sent out. 

“No President – Republican or Democrat – can withhold federal funding authorized and appropriated by Congress and paid for by Maine taxpayers in an attempt to coerce someone into compliance with his will,” Mills said in a statement. “It is a violation of our Constitution and of our laws, which I took an oath to uphold.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital reached out to the Maine Principals Association and Greely High School’s principal and assistant principals for comment but did not hear back in time for publication.

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Boston, MA

Mass. reports first two measles cases of 2026, including one in Greater Boston

Published

on

Mass. reports first two measles cases of 2026, including one in Greater Boston


Health

While infectious, the Boston-area adult visited several locations where others were likely exposed to the virus, according to health officials.

A photo of the measles virus under a microscope. 
Cynthia Goldsmith

Massachusetts health officials have confirmed the state’s first two measles cases of the year, a school-aged child and a Greater Boston adult. 

The Department of Public Health announced the cases Friday, marking the first report of measles in Massachusetts since 2024. 

Advertisement

According to health officials, the adult who was diagnosed returned home recently from abroad and had an “uncertain vaccination history.” While infectious, the person visited several locations where others were likely exposed to the virus, and health officials said they are working to identify and notify anyone affected

The child, meanwhile, is a Massachusetts resident who was exposed to the virus and diagnosed with measles out-of-state, where they remain during the infectious period. Health officials said the child does not appear to have exposed anyone in Massachusetts to measles. 

The two Massachusetts cases come as the U.S. battles a large national measles outbreak, which has seen 1,136 confirmed cases nationwide so far in 2026, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

“Our first two measles cases in 2026 demonstrate the impact that the measles outbreaks, nationally and internationally, can have here at home,” Massachusetts Public Health Commissioner Robbie Goldstein said Friday. “Fortunately, thanks to high vaccination rates, the risk to most Massachusetts residents remains low.” 

Measles is a highly contagious disease that spreads through the air when an infected person sneezes, coughs, or talks. The virus can linger in the air for up to two hours and may even spread through tissues or cups used by someone who has it, according to the DPH. 

Advertisement

Early symptoms occur 10 days to two weeks after exposure and may resemble a cold or cough, usually with a fever, health officials warned. A rash develops two to four days after the initial symptoms, appearing first on the head and shifting downward. 

According to the DPH, complications occur in about 30% of infected measles patients, ranging from immune suppression to pneumonia, diarrhea, and encephalitis — a potentially life-threatening inflammation of the brain. 

“Measles is the most contagious respiratory virus and can cause life-threatening illness,” Goldstein said. “These cases are a reminder of the need for health care providers and local health departments to remain vigilant for cases so that appropriate public health measures can be rapidly employed to prevent spread in the state. This is also a reminder that getting vaccinated is the best way for people to protect themselves from this disease.” 

According to the DPH, people who have had measles, or who have been vaccinated against measles, are considered immune. State health officials offer the following guidance for the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine:

  • Children should receive their first dose of the MMR vaccine at 12 to 15 months. School-aged children need two doses of the MMR vaccine.
  • Adults should have at least one dose of the MMR vaccine. Certain high-risk groups need two doses, including international travelers, health care workers, and college students. Adults who were born in the U.S. before 1957 are considered immune due to past exposures. 
Profile image for Abby Patkin

Abby Patkin is a general assignment news reporter whose work touches on public transit, crime, health, and everything in between.

Sign up for the Today newsletter

Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Pittsburg, PA

Pittsburgh International’s T. rex could soon disappear from view

Published

on

Pittsburgh International’s T. rex could soon disappear from view






Source link

Continue Reading

Connecticut

Connecticut moves to crack down on bottle redemption fraud

Published

on

Connecticut moves to crack down on bottle redemption fraud


It’s a scheme made famous by a nearly 30-year-old episode of the sitcom Seinfeld.

Hoping to earn a quick buck, two characters load a mail truck full of soda bottles and beer cans purchased with a redeemable 5-cent deposit in New York, before traveling to Michigan, where they can be recycled for 10 cents apiece. With few thousand cans, they calculate, the trip will earn a decent profit. In the end, the plan fell apart.

But after Connecticut raised the value of its own bottle deposits to 10 cents in 2024, officials say, they were caught off guard by a flood of such fraudulent returns coming in from out of state. Redemption rates have reached 97%, and some beverage distributors have reported millions of dollars in losses as a result of having to pay out for excess returns of their products.

On Thursday, state lawmakers passed an emergency bill to crack down on illegal returns by increasing fines, requiring redemption centers to keep track of bulk drop-offs and allowing local police to go after out-of-state violators.

Advertisement

“I’m heartbroken,” said House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, who supported the effort to increase deposits to 10 cents and expand the number of items eligible for redemption. “I spent a lot of political capital to get the bottle bill passed in 2021, and never in a million years did I think that New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island residents would return so many bottles.”

The legislation, Senate Bill 299, would increase fines for violating the bottle bill law from $50 to $500 on a first offense. For third and subsequent offenses, the penalty would increase from $250 to $2,000 and misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison.

In addition, it requires redemption centers to be licensed by the state’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (previously, those businesses were only required to register with DEEP). As a condition of their license, redemption centers must keep records of anyone seeking to redeem more than 1,000 bottles and cans in a single day.

Anyone not affiliated with a qualified nonprofit would be prohibited from redeeming more than 4,000 bottles a day, down from the previous limit of 5,000.

The bill also seeks to pressure some larger redemption centers into adopting automated scanning technologies, such as reverse vending machines, by temporarily lowering the handling fee that is paid on each beverage container processed by those centers.

Advertisement

The bill easily passed the Senate on Wednesday and the House on Thursday on its way to Gov. Ned Lamont.

While the bill drew bipartisan support, Republicans described it as a temporary fix to a growing problem.

House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, called the switch to 10-cent deposits an “unmitigated disaster” and said he believed out-of-state redemption centers were offloading much of their inventory within Connecticut.

“The sheer quantity that is being redeemed in the state of Connecticut, this isn’t two people putting cans into a post office truck,” Candelora said. “This is far more organized than that.”

The impact of those excess returns is felt mostly by the state’s wholesale beverage distributors, who initiate the redemption process by collecting an additional 10 cents on every eligible bottle and can they sell to supermarkets, liquor stores and other retailers within Connecticut. The distributors are required to pay that money back — plus a handling fee — once the containers are returned to the store or a redemption center.

Advertisement

According to the state’s Department of Revenue Services, nearly 12% of wholesalers reported having to pay out more redemptions than they collected in deposits in 2025. Those losses totaled $11.3 million.

Peter Gallo, the vice president of Star Distributors in West Haven, said his company’s losses alone have totaled more than $2 million since the increase on deposits went into effect two years ago. As time goes on, he said, the deficit has only grown.

“We’re hoping we can get something fixed here, because it’s a tough pill to be holding on to debt that we should get paid for,” Gallo said.

Still, officials say they have no way of tracking precisely how many of the roughly 2 billion containers that were redeemed in the state last year were illegally brought in from other states. That’s because most products lack any kind of identifiable marking indicating where they were sold.

“There’s no way to tell right now. That’s one of the core issues here,” said state Rep. John-Michael Parker, D-Madison, who co-chairs the legislature’s Environment Committee.

Advertisement

Parker said the issue could be solved if product labels were printed with a specific barcode or other feature that would be unique to Connecticut. Such a solution, for now, has faced technological challenges and pushback from the beverage industry, he said.

Not everyone involved in the handling, sorting and redemption of bottles is happy about the upcoming changes — or the process by which they were approved.

Francis Bartolomeo, the owner of a Fran’s Cans and Bart’s Bottles in Watertown, said he was only made aware of the legislation on Monday from a fellow redemption center owner. Since then, he said, he’s been contacting his legislators to oppose the bill and was frustrated by the lack of a public hearing.

“I know other people are as flabbergasted as I am because they don’t know where it comes out of,” Bartolomeo said “It’s a one sided affair, really.”

Bartolomeo said one of his biggest concerns with the bill is the $2,500 annual licensing fee that it would place on redemption centers. While he agreed that out-of-state redemptions are a problem, he said it should be up to the state to improve enforcement.

Advertisement

“We’re cleaning up the mess, and we’re going to end up being penalized,” Bartolomeo said. “Get rid of it and go back to 5 cents if it’s that big of a hindrance, but don’t penalize the redemption centers for what you imposed.”

Lynn Little of New Milford Redemption Center supports the increased penalties but believes the solution ultimately lies with better labeling by the distributors. She is also frustrated by the volume caps after the state initially gave grants to residents looking to open their own bottle redemption businesses.

“They’re taking a volume business, because any business where you make 3 cents per unit (the average handling fee) is a volume business, and limiting the volume we can take in, you’re crushing small businesses,” Little said.

Ritter said that he opposed a move back to the 5-cent deposit, which he noted was increased to encourage recycling. However, he said the current situation has become politically untenable and puts the state at risk of a lawsuit from distributors.

“We’re getting to a point where we’re going to lose the bottle bill,” Ritter said. “If we got sued in court, I think we’d lose.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending