WATCH: Betsy DeVos Tells Senate She Will Not Work to Prohibit Discrimination Against LGBTQ Students
Heated Exchange Ends With DeVos Refusing to Affirm She Will Protect Students From Anti-LGBT Discrimination
Betsy DeVos says her Dept. of Education will not work to protect LGBTQ students from discrimination nor will she establish a program to do so. The Secretary of Education appeared Tuesday morning before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee to discuss her education budget for 2018, when Democratic U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon asked her about LGBTQ students.
Senator Merkley began by having Secretary DeVos agree all schools that receive federal funding must follow federal laws regarding discrimination.Â
“But those laws are somewhat foggy in that area, so I want to be absolutely clear about what you’re saying,” Sen. Merkley continued, asking DeVos if she were saying that private schools receiving federal funds would not be allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ students.
“Schools that receive federal funds must follow federal law,” DeVos responded, seemingly tossing out a rote response.
Merkley repeated that federal law on anti-LGBTQ discrimination is “foggy,” and asked her again if discrimination against LGBTQ students will be allowed.
“On areas where the law is unsettled, this Department is not going to be issuing decrees – ” DeVos began.Â
Merkley interjected, requesting she answer his question.
“That is a matter for Congress and the courts – ” DeVos continued.
Exchange between @SenJeffMerkley & Secretary @BetsyDeVosED on LGBTQ and religious discrimination. pic.twitter.com/48s08uFtuO
— CSPAN (@cspan) June 6, 2017
Merkley again interjected, asking her again to answer his question.
“On areas of unsettled law, Congress and the Supreme Court has to decide and settle.”
“Are you refusing to answer the question?” Merkley asked, as the exchange got heated.
“I’m going back to what I said earlier,” DeVos insisted.
“Well, what you said earlier didn’t help us,” Merkley noted. “But I think you just said is where it’s unsettled such discrimination will continue to be allowed under your program. If that’s incorrect please correct it for the record.”
But Senator Merkley wasn’t finished.
“How about discrimination based on religion? Will such discrimination be allowed with charter or private schools?”
As has become her pattern, DeVos stuck to her statement.
“Again, on schools that receive federal funds, federal law must be followed.”
Merkley asked again, insisting she “answer the question.”
“Schools that receive federal funds will follow federal law, period,” DeVos, with a somewhat defiant grin, responded.
“You’re refusing to answer the question. I think that’s very important for the public to know that today, the Secretary of Education  before this Committee refused to affirm that she would put forth a program that would ban discrimination based on LGBTQ status of students, or ban discrimination based on religion.”
DeVos countered.
“Sir, that’s not what I said. Discrimination in any form is wrong,” DeVos offered, having noted previously she would take no action against it.
“Does your program ban discrimination?” Merkley pressed, referring to her charter and private school program.
“As I said before, and let me say again, schools that receive federal funds need to follow federal law. Period,” she said, again offering a grin.
During her last appearance before a Senate committee just two weeks ago, Secretary DeVos said she has no problem with states that allow schools to discriminate against LGBT students while receiving federal funds, and believes that the federal government should not intervene. She also pointed to school choice as an opportunity for parents to find schools that won’t discriminate against their children, if that’s something they want.
Â
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
|
Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.
Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”
“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”
In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”
He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”
“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”
“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”
“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.
“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”
Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”
Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.
Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) July 6, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.
“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”
The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”
Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”
TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”
Critics blasted Trump.
“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.
One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”
Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”
The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.
According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.
Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”
“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”
Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”
Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.
Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.
The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.
“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.
The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.
“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”
Image via Reuters
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
