Civil Rights

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a multistate coalition in filing two lawsuits — against the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) — that challenge the Trump Administration’s attempt to obtain the sensitive personal information of millions of drivers who have either a commercial driver’s license or commercial driver’s permit required to drive large, heavy, or hazardous commercial vehicles. The two federal agencies are demanding that the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) produce this sensitive information, which includes drivers’ names, license numbers, licensing states, and more. In the lawsuits, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that this broad demand for information is another example of federal overreach that weaponizes the personal data of specialized commercial drivers and runs afoul of the law. 

“True to form, the Trump Administration is again attempting to seize personal, sensitive data — this time from commercial drivers. Any such attempt is a capricious and dangerous federal overreach that must be stopped,” said Attorney General Bonta. “We’ve sued to block the blatant misuse of Medicaid, SNAP, and TANF data, and today, we’re suing again. Let me be clear: when the President crosses the line, we’ll be there to stand up for privacy rights and keep him in his lane. If the President wants to stop going to court, he should stop breaking the law.”

BACKGROUND

Founded in 1933, AAMVA represents state, provincial, and territorial motor vehicle officials in the United States and Canada. Among other functions, AAMVA operates a federally mandated system called the Commercial Driver’s License Information System (CDLIS). States use CDLIS to search for specific individuals applying for a commercial driver’s license, which is required to operate large, heavy, or hazardous commercial vehicles, such as semi-trucks, as opposed to a standard driver’s license that allows a driver to operate a passenger vehicle. CDLIS allows states, for example, to confirm that a person applying for a commercial driver’s license does not have such a license in another state. 

The federal government has historically used the information system to search for records on an individual basis, but FMCSA has now threatened to withhold funding for AAMVA and terminate the cooperative agreement under which CDLIS exists and operates, subject to demands for the records of millions of people in the system — resulting in another dangerous attempt to obtain sensitive data. DHS, in coordination with FMCSA, has issued a subpoena seeking these very same records. In the lawsuits, among other arguments, the coalition argues that these demands for CDLIS data exceed FMCSA’s and DHS’s authority, are barred by the federal Drivers Privacy Protection Act, and are barred by the protections of the federal Privacy Act.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to protecting personal and private data. Last week, Attorney General Bonta sued over the Trump Administration’s attempt to weaponize sensitive personal information about California families and children. He has also sued and secured a court order blocking the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services from providing DHS with unfettered access to individual personal health data. Previously, he also challenged and secured relief blocking the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s demand that states turn over personal and sensitive information about millions of SNAP recipients.

In filing these lawsuits, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Illinois, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, as well as the state of Pennsylvania. Additionally, the attorney general of Minnesota joined the DHS case. 

As extreme weather events increase in frequency and intensity, localities must ensure that people with disabilities are central to all emergency preparedness, response, and recovery efforts 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued a statewide guidance letter to local jurisdictions reminding them of their obligations under federal and state disability access laws to ensure that people with disabilities have meaningful access to emergency preparedness, response, and recovery. The guidance, developed by the California Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Enforcement Section through its Disability Rights Bureau, makes clear that inclusive emergency planning is a legal requirement that must be built into how local governments prepare for and respond to disasters.

“Every Californian deserves to know that their government has a plan for them — especially in moments of crisis,” said Attorney General Bonta. “California’s local jurisdictions have a legal obligation to integrate the needs of people with disabilities into all phases of emergency management — preparedness, response, and recovery. Today my office is releasing guidance to remind local jurisdictions of their legal obligations to their residents with disabilities and reaffirm California’s longstanding commitment to disability rights.”

People with disabilities often face significant barriers to critical support before, during, and after emergencies and disasters, like emergency notifications, evacuation, transportation, shelter and mass care, and recovery. As a result, people with disabilities are estimated to experience at least double the mortality rate of the general population during emergencies. Local jurisdictions must comply with disability access laws in their preparation for, response to, and recovery from emergencies. Under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and applicable California laws, local governments must proactively plan for the needs of people with disabilities — people with disabilities cannot be required to individually request accommodations at the time of an emergency. These obligations extend to services delivered through private contractors. The guidance letter outlines these legal requirements and provides local jurisdictions with practical information to support compliance. The letter also highlights state and federal resources available to support local compliance, including training and planning information from state agencies.

The letter provides guidance in four key areas of emergency management:

• Accessible notifications and communications.
• Evacuation planning, including accessible transportation, medical equipment, and service animals.
• Sheltering, including accessible facilities, assistive technology, medical supplies, and staff training.
• Reintegration, including support reconnecting people with care, services, and accessible housing after a disaster.

The guidance letter is available at oag.ca.gov/civil/disability-rights.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to enforcing the laws that protect Californians with disabilities and ensuring that California is accessible and safe for all. In February, he formally announced an investigation related to the emergency response to the Eaton Fire. Specifically, the investigation will seek to determine whether there was potential race, age, or disability discrimination in the emergency preparations and response in the historically Black community of West Altadena. The investigation is ongoing. 

Files amicus brief in support of New York’s Green Light Law 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, as part of a multistate coalition, filed an amicus brief in defense of New York’s Driver’s License Access and Privacy Act, or “Green Light Law.” This law restricts the New York Department of Motor Vehicles’ (DMV) disclosure of drivers’ personal information to immigration enforcement agencies absent a court order or judicial warrant. The Trump Administration filed a lawsuit challenging the law, and a district court granted New York’s request to dismiss the complaint, rejecting the Trump Administration’s “sweeping” interpretation of 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and holding that the statute applies only to information about an individual’s citizenship or immigration status. The Trump Administration subsequently appealed the decision. In the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that states like New York have reasonably concluded that disentangling their state from civil immigration enforcement promotes public safety and public trust and that these types of state laws are constitutional and do not impede federal immigration enforcement.   

“The Trump Administration continues to try to bully states for choosing to use their limited resources to promote public safety rather than assist in federal civil immigration enforcement,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Time and time again, the Trump Administration’s distorted view of our Constitution has been firmly rejected by courts — and time and time again, the Trump Administration has found new ways to waste taxpayer dollars on fruitless legal fights. New York’s Green Light law is a thoughtful exercise of state authority to protect the safety and well-being of its residents. As Attorney General, I will always stand up for public safety and the rights of our immigrant communities and support states that do the same.” 

New York’s Green Light Law (1) prohibits DMV from disclosing certain personal information and records to any agency that primarily enforces immigration law absent a court order or judicial warrant; (2) requires DMV, within three days of receiving a request for information from an agency that enforces immigration law, to notify the subject of the request; and (3) mandates that DMV require any person that accesses its information or records to certify that they will not use it for civil immigration purposes. In dismissing the Trump Administration’s lawsuit, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York found that the Green Light Law is a lawful exercise of state authority to regulate the conduct of its officials and that it does not infringe on or impede federal immigration statutes. 

In the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition urge the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to uphold the lower court’s dismissal of the lawsuit, arguing that: 

• States like New York have reasonably concluded that limiting the use of state and local resources in civil immigration enforcement promotes public safety.
• State laws like New York’s are constitutional and do not serve as obstacles to the implementation of federal law, and the United States’s contrary argument raises serious Tenth Amendment concerns.
• New York’s law neither directly regulates the federal government nor impermissibly discriminates against it.

California has a number of laws that limit the use of state and local resources in civil immigration enforcement. Shortly before President Trump returned to office, Attorney General Bonta issued a package of updated bulletins and new guidance to assist state and local law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and defense counsel in complying with state law as California prepares for new threats to its immigrant communities. The Attorney General has also released a number of guidance documents to help California immigrants better understand their rights and protections under the law and assist state and local agencies, TK-12 schools, and childcare providers and preschool programs comply with new state laws. The full set of resources, available in multiple languages, can be accessed at oag.ca.gov/immigrant/. 

In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of New Jersey, the District of Columbia, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Santa Clara County Counsel Tony LoPresti filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in their ongoing effort to block the illegal development of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in the unincorporated area of Santa Clara County near Gilroy, California. Earlier this month, Attorney General Bonta and County Counsel LoPresti filed a lawsuit challenging the unlawful development of this facility, arguing that it violates the National Environmental Policy Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and California’s Williamson Act. In their motion for a preliminary injunction, Attorney General Bonta and County Counsel LoPresti detail the dangers of developing such a facility without any environmental review or consultation with state and local governments. Without judicial intervention to halt ongoing development, the federal government will continue its reckless attempt to construct a facility that threatens the local ecosystem, habitat, and infrastructure, along with the many people and families who would be impacted by this facility.

“This attempt to construct an ICE facility without complying with the applicable laws is dangerous for the environment and for our people. California refuses to stand idly by,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “We’re asking the court to pause this development and ensure the interests of our communities are properly protected. The law isn’t written in disappearing ink, and it’s time for the Trump Administration to take a step back and read it clearly.”

“This motion demonstrates that, with public health and the environment at stake, the federal government chose secrecy over transparency and speed over deliberation,” said Santa Clara County Counsel Tony LoPresti. “We’re confident the court will hold the federal government accountable to the clear legal requirements that apply to this project — requirements that the federal government has so far completely ignored.”

In January 2025, a private developer leased the 24.5-acre parcel to the federal government for use by ICE — likely as an Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) holding facility. ERO holding facilities, which are primarily designed for administrative processing and short-term detainment, have been the subject of numerous lawsuits during the Trump Administration, and investigative reports have revealed frequent overcrowding, long-term confinement, and inhumane conditions. Since leasing the property near Gilroy, the federal government has proceeded with a plan to quickly and surreptitiously develop a facility. In doing so, the federal government has ignored important environmental concerns and federal laws. 

The construction of the facility threatens to cause the release of hazardous materials and disrupt the ecosystem, habitat, and agricultural value of land that the county and the state have protected for exclusively agricultural uses since the 1960s. The project is also likely to have severe impacts on vital infrastructure, overwhelming a septic system designed for much smaller use. This motion for a preliminary injunction asks the court to halt the development of the facility, which includes designing, procuring, renovating, retrofitting, demolishing, constructing, or taking any other actions to physically alter the property.

In their motion, Attorney General Bonta and County Counsel LoPresti argue that:

• The federal government’s decision to enter into a lease agreement and begin construction for a holding facility at the property is a major federal action with likely significant impacts to the environment, which triggered environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act. 
• The federal government did not attempt to consult with the county or the state to solicit their views about the project, and the federal government’s obscurement of its plans to develop and operate a holding facility at the property prevented the county and the state from providing input to the federal government, in violation of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act.
• These failures and violations of law warrant a preliminary injunction and halting the construction because the federal government must abide by the law, and the real and likely harm from continuing development outweighs the risk of delaying construction.   

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced that hate crime guidance and resources are now available in Somali (Know Your Rights and Protections Under Hate Crimes Laws, How to Report Hate Crimes and Incidents and Get Help). Earlier this month, in response to reports of childcare providers in California facing targeted harassment, surveillance, and stalking by internet vigilantes alleging fraudulent activity, Attorney General Bonta reminded Californians of existing guidance and resources for law enforcement, prosecutors, and victims of hate crimes. According to reports, these actions have involved uninvited home visits and filming. The United Domestic Workers union reported a spike in harassment at Somali-run daycare centers in San Diego.  

“Reports that internet vigilantes are harassing San Diegan childcare providers at their homes and workplaces are extremely alarming. California has laws that prohibit this type of harassment,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Last week, I denounced these deplorable acts, and today, I am happy to announce that hate crime resources are now available in the Somali language. I encourage all Californians and law enforcement agencies to know their rights and familiarize themselves with laws that protect individuals.” 

In California, it is considered a hate crime if you are targeted because of your actual or perceived nationality, including your immigration or citizenship status. If you witness or are the victim of a hate crime, you should report it to your local law enforcement agency. California law prohibits law enforcement authorities from asking individuals, including those who are reporting or victims of potential crimes, about their immigration status, unless the information is necessary to certify the victim for a U visa (victim of crime visa) or T visa (victim of human trafficking visa). 

Resources for the Reporting of and Response to Hate Crimes

Crimes motivated by hate are not just attacks on individual innocent people — they are attacks on our communities and the entire State. It is the job of the California Department of Justice to see that the laws of the State are uniformly and adequately enforced.

For law enforcement and prosecutors:

• Law Enforcement Bulletin on Laws Prohibiting Hate Crimes and/or Providing for Enhanced Penalties for Specific Hate Crimes
• Hate Crimes Rapid Response Protocol for the Deployment of CADOJ Resources
• Guidance to Prosecutors on Hate Crimes

For victims of hate crimes:

• Know Your Rights and Protections Under Hate Crimes Laws (now available in Somali)
• How to Report Hate Crimes and Incidents and Get Help. This brochure is available in: Spanish, Arabic, Armenian, Cambodian, Chinese (Simplified), Chinese (Traditional), Farsi, Japanese, Korean, Punjabi, Russian, Somali, Tagalog, and Vietnamese

More information on hate crimes is available at oag.ca.gov/hatecrimes.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta co-led a coalition of 24 attorneys general in sending a comment letter to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) opposing an unlawful attempt to rollback regulations under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The FHA prohibits discrimination based on the effects of a housing policy, even if the intent of the policy was not to discriminate. HUD’s proposed rule change would remove all mentions of liability under the FHA for discrimination that results from the effects of an action. 

“Once again, the Trump Administration is attempting to shirk its obligation to end housing discrimination and foster diverse communities. We fought similar attempts during the first Trump presidency, and we have no qualms about doing so again now,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This is a matter of right and wrong. While we have made progress in recent decades, there’s still more work to do — and my fellow attorneys general and I are committed to protecting the hard-won gains that have been made and building on them.”

In their letter, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition assert that discrimination and segregation in housing persist in the country and disproportionately harm people of color, women, LGBTQ+ individuals, individuals with disabilities, and other historically marginalized groups. The coalition is urging HUD to keep the current rule in place to ensure greater equality of opportunity in housing. 

The attorneys general argue that:

• Discriminatory effects liability is a critical tool for HUD and states to enforce the FHA and state laws and to protect residents against arbitrary and unnecessary practices that limit access to housing. States have used discriminatory effects claims to challenge many types of seemingly neutral policies that can have a discriminatory effect, such as zoning ordinances, occupancy restrictions, no-pet policies, and English-only policies.
• Removal of these regulations would increase burdens on state agencies to provide information about rights and responsibilities. It would also send a false message that certain forms of unlawful discrimination are now acceptable, even though they remain prohibited under the law. 
• The proposed rule change would be unlawful because HUD failed to provide a justification for removing the longstanding regulations and because the existing rule accurately reflects federal law. They also argue HUD failed to consider that the existing rule benefits the public by providing a consistent, nationwide resource that clearly explains what conduct violates the FHA and what the legal standard is for making discrimination claims and defending against them.

The comment letter was co-led by Attorney General Bonta, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Joining them are the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

LOS ANGELES — California Attorney General Bonta today formally announced the commencement of an investigation by the California Department of Justice (DOJ) related to the emergency response to the Eaton Fire. Specifically, the investigation will seek to determine whether there was potential race, age, or disability discrimination in the emergency preparations and response in the historically Black community of West Altadena. The Eaton Fire burned 14,021 acres, killing at least 19 people, destroying over 9,000 buildings, and becoming one of the deadliest fires in California history. The average age of the people who died was 77 years old. 

“Today, the California Department of Justice formally announces an investigation into the emergency response during the 2025 Eaton Fire. My office will be investigating whether there was race, age, or disability discrimination in the emergency response in West Altadena, which claimed the lives of at least 19 people. Specifically, we'll be looking at whether the systems and structures at play contributed to a delay in the County’s evacuation notice and possible disparities in emergency response in West Altadena,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The West Altadena community rang the alarm and brought compelling evidence to the attention of my office. We know that evacuation warnings for the historically Black neighborhood of West Altadena came many hours after these same warnings were sent to the rest of Altadena. We must let the facts uncovered by our investigation determine what went wrong here, but one thing holds true: The people of West Altadena deserve answers to their questions and deserve institutions that are responsive to their concerns, and institutions they can trust. As the People’s Attorney, I and the entirety of the California Department of Justice work for the People. I thank the communities that reached out, spoke up, and organized during a time of immense grief, loss, and rebuilding.”

The investigation will be spearheaded by DOJ’s Civil Rights Enforcement Section. DOJ's investigation will focus on potential violations of civil rights laws, legal questions that fall under DOJ’s purview. While DOJ is committed to transparency, in order to protect the integrity of this investigation, no further updates can be given at this time.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today shared hate crime guidance and resources in response to reports of childcare providers in California facing targeted harassment, surveillance, and stalking by internet vigilantes alleging fraudulent activity. Attorney General Bonta reminds Californians of existing guidance and resources for law enforcement, prosecutors, and victims of hate crimes. According to reports, these actions have involved uninvited home visits and filming. Last week, the United Domestic Workers union reported a spike in harassment at Somali-run daycare centers in San Diego. This is not only dangerous and terrifying for daycare providers, but also the children they care for. 

“Reports that pseudo-investigators are stalking and intimidating San Diegan childcare providers at their homes and places of business are extremely alarming. Our childcare providers do critical work and are the backbone of what makes life possible for many working families. These internet vigilantes are harassing Californians and seeking to alienate folks from their neighbors and communities, right out of the Trumpian playbook,” said Attorney General Bonta. “California has laws that prohibit this type of harassment. I encourage Californians and law enforcement agencies to know their rights and familiarize themselves with laws that protect folks. No one should be harassed at work.”

In California, it is considered a hate crime if you are targeted because of your actual or perceived nationality, including your immigration or citizenship status. If you witness or are the victim of a hate crime, you should report it to your local law enforcement agency. California law prohibits law enforcement authorities from asking individuals, including those who are reporting or victims of potential crimes, about their immigration status, unless the information is necessary to certify the victim for a U visa (victim of crime visa) or T visa (victim of human trafficking visa). 

Resources for the Reporting of and Response to Hate Crimes

Crimes motivated by hate are not just attacks on individual innocent people — they are attacks on our communities and the entire State. It is the job of the California Department of Justice to see that the laws of the State are uniformly and adequately enforced.

For law enforcement and prosecutors: 

The California Department of Justice has tools and resources to aid and assist local, state, and federal law enforcement authorities in the investigation of possible hate crimes, including the identification, arrest, prosecution, and conviction of the perpetrators of those crimes. If you wish to report a crime, please file a report with the local police or sheriff's department. 

• Law Enforcement Bulletin on Laws Prohibiting Hate Crimes and/or Provide for Enhanced Penalties for Specific Hate Crimes
• Hate Crimes Rapid Response Protocol for the Deployment of CADOJ Resources
• Guidance to Prosecutors on Hate Crimes

For victims of hate crimes: 

A hate crime is a crime against a person, group, or property motivated by the victim's real or perceived protected social group. You may be the victim of a hate crime if you have been targeted because of your actual or perceived: (1) disability, (2) gender, (3) nationality, (4) race or ethnicity, (5) religion, (6) sexual orientation, and/or (7) association with a person or group with one or more of these actual or perceived characteristics. Hate crimes are serious crimes that may result in imprisonment or jail time. If you are the victim of a hate crime you should:

• Contact the local law enforcement agency right away.
• Get medical attention (if you need it).
• Write down the exact words that were said.
• Make notes about any other facts.
• Save all evidence (e.g., graffiti, eggshells, writing on victim's vehicle). If safe, wait until law enforcement arrives and takes photos.
• Get the names, addresses, phone numbers, and emails of other victims and witnesses.
• Try to get a description from any eyewitnesses of the criminal or the vehicle.
• Contact community organizations in your area that respond to hate crimes.

For more information and printable PDFs, please visit:

• Know Your Rights and Protections Under Hate Crimes Laws
• How to Report Hate Crimes and Incidents and Get Help. This brochure is available in: Spanish, Arabic, Armenian, Cambodian, Chinese (Simplified), Chinese (Traditional), Farsi, Japanese, Korean, Punjabi, Russian, Tagalog, and Vietnamese

More information on hate crimes is available at oag.ca.gov/hatecrimes.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today co-led a coalition of 16 attorneys general in filing a comment letter opposing the U.S. Department of Education (U.S. ED)’s proposal to remove certain reporting requirements that help U.S. ED identify significant disproportionalities in special education programming for children with disabilities based on race. Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that U.S. ED’s proposal removes valuable oversight of state methodologies, overestimates the burden the current reporting requirements place on states, and harms states’ abilities to ensure equal opportunities and outcomes for all students. Attorney General Bonta and the coalition also argue that U.S. ED has failed to adequately address comments made in response to the proposal’s previous announcement. 

“President Trump’s Department of Education is using flawed reasoning and ignoring public comment in its effort to end reporting requirements that help address race-based inequalities in special education for students with disabilities,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Students of color are disproportionately identified as children with disabilities compared to their peers, and too often by mistake. This was true when U.S. ED first announced this proposal, and it remains true now. Yet U.S. ED has failed to meaningfully address the concerns that my fellow attorneys general and I expressed in this proposal’s first comment period. We will not stand by while U.S. ED attempts to baselessly halt oversight of methodologies that help states identify and address racial and ethnic inequities in our classrooms. We will continue to fight for evidence-based educational systems that improve outcomes for all students.” 

On August 22, 2025, U.S. ED announced a proposal to no longer require states to submit to the Department for review changes to the methodologies they use to identify significant disproportionalities in special education programming for children with disabilities based on race. On October 21, 2025, Attorney General Bonta filed a multistate comment letter urging U.S. ED to withdraw the proposal. On January 9, 2026, U.S. ED announced a second request for public comment regarding its proposal.  

In today’s letter, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition once again urge U.S. ED to reconsider and withdraw its proposal. In the letter, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that:

• U.S. ED’s proposal would end much-needed oversight and prevent U.S. ED from fulfilling its obligation to assess changes states make to their methodologies for assessing significant disproportionalities based on race. 
• U.S. ED has failed to adequately address public comments made in response to its August 2025 announcement of the proposal, including the common sentiment that the public values the collection and publication of states’ methodologies.
• To justify its proposal, U.S. ED relies on an overestimation of the burden the affected reporting requirement places on states. From states’ experiences, the reporting burden is both minimal and worth bearing to identify and address significant disproportionality.
• Eliminating the states’ obligation to report changes to their methodology for calculating significant disproportionate representation in special education undermines the states’ interest in ensuring public transparency and equal educational opportunities and outcomes for all students, including students of color and students with disabilities. 

Attorney General Bonta and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul co-led today’s letter, and are joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined 12 attorneys general in submitting an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in Female Athletes United v. Ellison opposing challenges to Minnesota’s policies allowing transgender students to participate in youth sports in a manner consistent with their gender identity. In the brief, the attorneys general argue that transgender inclusive state laws have long been demonstrated to meet Title IX requirements, improve transgender youth’s physical and mental health, and create more positive school environments for all students.

“State laws like those in Minnesota protect transgender students’ right to thrive in school environments as their authentic selves,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Female Athletes United is attempting to use a misinterpretation of Title IX to justify discrimination against transgender youth. We will continue to fight against unlawful attacks on transgender and other LGBTQ+ individuals’ rights whenever and wherever they occur.”

On May 19, 2025, the advocacy group Female Athletes United (FAU) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota requesting a preliminary injunction against the Minnesota Attorney General and other state officials. FAU alleged that Minnesota’s statewide policy allowing transgender students to compete in sports in a manner consistent with their gender identity violates Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. In September, the district court denied FAU’s motion, and FAU filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. 

In the amicus brief, the coalition urges the Eighth Circuit to affirm the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction. In the brief, the coalition argues that:

• States have a long history of upholding laws protecting transgender youth from discrimination. These laws have demonstrably improved physical and mental health for transgender students and enabled school climates that facilitate better educational outcomes for all, without reducing opportunities for cisgender students.
• In contrast to FAU’s claims, federal legal precedent overwhelmingly shows transgender inclusive policies are permitted under Title IX.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to protecting the rights of transgender individuals to live life as their authentic selves. Last month, Attorney General Bonta joined a multistate amicus brief supporting transgender students’ challenges to West Virginia and Idaho laws forbidding transgender girls from participating in sex-separated sports consistent with their gender identity.

In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Washington, Connecticut, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont.