True North Legal

“A decade ago, Representative Scott and I fought against the Minnesota State High School League’s outrageous policy erasing girls from girls’ sports.

Together, alongside other legislators and mothers of female athletes across the state, we promised to fight for our daughters. We’ve been fighting ever since. And now, courageous young girls from across the state are joining the fight.

HF 12 is more than a bill. It is the assurance of justice for Minnesota girls. It makes clear that Minnesota laws intended to protect our girls cannot be used against them!

We stand with the 79% of Americans who do not approve of males hijacking opportunities that belong to our girls, making a mockery of their athletic achievements, while compromising their emotional well-being and physical safety.

Advocating for female athletes against aggressive attempts to push them out of their own sports is always the right thing to do. At the heart of this issue is something much deeper than sports. We are fighting a cultural battle regarding the truth about God’s good design for men and women. And we’re fighting on the winning side.”

– Renee Carlson, General Counsel of True North Legal

Dear Editor,

Rochelle Olson’s column, “Republicans choose to squander their leadership by attacking trans girls” (March 4, 2025), is almost artistic in the way it dances around the truth. For example, Olson perpetuates the myth spread by progressive lawmakers that the Preserve Girls’ Sports Act would lead to invasive physical examinations to determine someone’s birth sex. The bill says or implies nothing of the kind.

Olson continues to wrongly state that a January poll in the New York Times, which found that 79% of Americans believe in preserving girls’-only teams was limited to collegiate athletics, when in fact there was no such qualifier. 

As the legislative testimony of four doctors, including a physician at the USA Olympic Training Center made clear, it is unfair to ask girls playing on female teams to make room for male athletes who identify as transgender. Female athletes understand this, and are standing up to fight it.

Olson agrees that it would be unfair if male athletes were snapping up medals and records in girls’ sports, but denies that this is happening. It is happening. To take just one example, Olson’s assertion would certainly be news to the female athletes in Washington state who saw all three podium spots in a women’s cycling competition taken by transgender competitors last year. How many more examples does Olson need before this narrative falls apart?

Sincerely,

Renee Carlson, General Counsel | True North Legal

Moses Bratrud, Director of Communications | Minnesota Family Council

President Trump’s Executive Order protecting female athletes makes clear that the hard-fought gains of women and girls in athletics can no longer be denied! While this is a significant victory for women and girls across the country, the battle here in Minnesota is far from over.

Just yesterday the Minnesota State High School League (MSHSL) doubled down on their commitment in allowing males to hijack our daughter’s podiums, rosters, and spots on a team, as well as their physical safety.

Alongside legislators and other allies, I’ve worked to protect women and girls in sports since 2014, even testifying in strong opposition at the MSHSL hearing that ushered in their discriminatory policy. As an attorney and a mother, I’m in this for the long game.

That’s why True North Legal will continue fighting to protect women and girls in sports through grassroots engagement, public policy, and the courts. Trampling on one girl’s rights is one too many.

Originally published in the Star Tribune – written by Renee K. Carlson and Kayla Toney

Diversity is undoubtedly an important feature of the state of Minnesota and the U.S. as a whole. America is a pluralistic society where people of any faith are free to practice their religion in the way they see fit and raise their children according to their sincere religious beliefs. Thus, any emphasis on diversity and inclusion must acknowledge and respect religious families as valuable members of a diverse society, because religion is a protected class under the law and the Constitution.

That’s why six Somali Muslim families in St. Louis Park decided to stand up for their faith and their children. When their third- and fourth-grade students were exposed to books and discussions promoting LGBTQ sexuality and identity without their knowledge or consent, their mothers took a simple, peaceful action. They asked their elementary school principals if they could opt their children out of these lessons, without changing the curriculum one bit — and the school district refused.

That was in October 2023. A few weeks later, several Somali moms testified at a school board meeting, respectfully asking for notice and opt-outs when their children encounter teaching about LGBTQ sexuality. One of the board members responded with open hostility, saying that “as a queer person,” she “expected solidarity” from the Muslim community, and that “we don’t need to talk about” their concerns. She refused to engage with the moms and left the meeting.

That’s when True North Legal and First Liberty Institute stepped in. We sent a demand letter on Nov. 2, explaining that Minnesota’s opt-out law requires school districts to provide notice to parents and the opportunity to request alternative learning. We also explained that the First Amendment protects parents’ ability to raise their children in accordance with their sincere religious beliefs, and that the school district’s hostility to these religious parents because of their faith violated the Free Exercise Clause.

Three weeks later, the district created an “Alternative Learning Procedure” that had not existed before, and posted it on its website in English, Spanish and Somali along with a newsletter letting families know about it for the first time. In January and February 2024, all six families, along with dozens of other families of various backgrounds, received written guarantees from the school district that their requests were granted. St. Louis Park Middle and High Schools granted opt-outs as well.

Thanks to these parents’ willingness to stand up for their religious beliefs and for their children, any parent can now request an opt-out for any reason. This means the protections of the First Amendment and Minnesota’s opt-out laws have become a reality for any parent who cares about what their child is learning in class. This is a win for all Minnesota parents and families who believe that parents have the right to teach their own children about sexuality, and to determine when kids should learn about sensitive topics.

As parents of young children, our clients share the same concerns of many parents across this state and the nation. They simply asked the school district to follow the law by giving them notice and an opportunity for alternative learning instruction when they learned that the school was teaching their children about sexuality and gender ideology that goes directly against their religious beliefs and what that their kids are learning at home.

While we are encouraged that the district has granted our clients’ requests, we are disappointed that some lawmakers and other groups have mischaracterized our clients’ requests, and that they have expressed vocal opposition to the rights of various faith communities in Minnesota. Families from a wide range of faith backgrounds, including Protestants, Catholics, Muslims, Orthodox Jews, Hindus and others who have sincerely held religious beliefs about human sexuality. And regardless of faith affiliation, many parents agree that they — not school administrators — should decide when and how their elementary-aged children encounter topics such as LGBTQ sexuality.

Like many other kinds of religious exemptions that are protected by law, opt-outs are a peaceful, pluralistic way to ensure that no one’s beliefs are trampled upon. Opt-outs are a very workable solution, because students are pulled out of class all the time for various reasons, including tutoring, English as a second language, music lessons and family commitments. Classmates will likely not even notice that some students are reading a different book or stepping out of class briefly, and they will certainly not know the reason why.

We are encouraged that our clients’ opt-out requests have been granted without needing to go to court at this time. However, we will continue to monitor the situation to ensure that our clients and other families receive the opt-outs they have been promised, and that their constitutional rights are not ignored or violated again. In a spirit of diversity and inclusion, let’s work together to ensure that religious diversity is respected, and religious families are included — across this beautiful state and across the nation.

True North Legal was at the U.S. Supreme Court this week alongside other allies for oral arguments in Free Speech Coalition, Inc v. Paxton. True North Legal and Minnesota Family Council are part of a national coalition to protect children from “Big Porn” online. Renee Carlson of our True North Legal initiative & Brittany Jones of Kansas Family Foundation filed an amicus brief in this case supporting the Texas law being challenged, H.B. 1181. To ensure that children are not exposed to horrible and graphic content on these websites, Texas enacted H.B. 1181 requiring age verification for adult’s desiring to access pornographic websites. Click here and here to access updates from True North Legal while at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Quite early in oral arguments, many of the justices raised the concerns that we discussed in our amicus brief to the Court. One crucial point being just how much technology has changed since 1997 and 2004, when the Court took up similar cases about protecting kids from harmful online material. Many of the justices agreed that children must be protected from being exposed to vile and graphic online pornographic material found on sites like Porn Hub, one of the groups challenging the Texas law at issue in this case, claiming it infringes on adults’ First Amendment rights. In one exchange between the justices and counsel for the porn industry, Justice Kagan, an Obama appointee, referred to porn as “printed smut.” Overall, the Court portrayed a collective and even bold sense of disgust for the predatory nature of the online porn industry and its impact on children.

During oral arguments many of the justices also articulated and understood (contrary to arguments made by Porn Hub), that as technology continues to advance, filters aren’t enough to protect children.  Justice Alito quite pointedly asked counsel for Porn Hub: “Do you know a lot of parents who are really tech savvy—more than their fifteen-year-olds?” Justice Barrett, a mother of seven children, also continued to press on this issue, expressing concern that filters aren’t as effective. This is significant as the porn industry has argued that filters are a better alternative to laws requiring age verification and has made these arguments in legislative bodies and lower courts across the country. Thankfully, many of the Supreme Court justices weren’t buying that argument. 

It comes down to this: Laws like H.B. 1181, provide common sense safeguards and protections for children from being preyed on by the pornography industry. These types of laws have been enacted in many other states across the country with bipartisan support. Please join us in praying that the Texas law is upheld, and for continued collaboration by the diverse coalition who has come together to fight this not only in the states, but across the globe! You can read more about True North Legal’s vital work on this case and the full brief here.

This week the Minnesota Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Cooper v. USA Powerlifting & USA Powerlifting Minnesota. UnderUSAPL policy, distinct competitive categories exist, including sex-based categories prohibiting a male athlete from entering the female-only category. At issue in this case is whether USAPL discriminated against plaintiff JayCee Cooper, a male who identifies as a female, in alleged violation of Minnesota law by not allowing Cooper to participate in USAPL’s women only powerlifting category. 

True North Legal submitted an amicus brief in this case representing Minnesota Family Council and the National Legal Foundation, in support of female athletes desiring to preserve female only competitions. The case is extremely important in the fight to ensure that the hard-fought gains of female athletes in all sports and at all levels of competition are not erased. Women deserve a safe and fair playing field, especially in strength competitions like female powerlifting. True North Legal’s brief details how Minnesota law, including the Minnesota Human Rights Act, requires that female athletics be reserved for female athletes, and speaks to the avalanche of evidence and data regarding the necessity to protect women-only sports categories. Most significantly, the brief incorporates data from the recently published UN Report cataloging the necessity of allowing sex-based distinctions in sport — in other words, only females should compete in female-only categories in USAPL competitions. Women should not be forced to compete against males who identify as transgender women. Make-bodied athletes do not belong in female athletic competitions regardless of how they identify. 

Yes, it really is and should be that simple. Minnesota law was enacted to protect against any attempt by males to hijack women’s sports opportunities, which is exactly what plaintiff Jaycee Cooper, and plaintiff’s counsel, Gender Justice asked the Minnesota Supreme Court to do during oral arguments.

And if you don’t take our word for it, consider the number of NCAA college athletes who have voiced public concern about males playing in female sports. Most recently a number of NCAA female volleyball teams have chosen to forfeit their games impacting their overall ranking and ability to compete in future playoffs because they refuse to risk their health and safety by competing against a team with a male athlete identifying as female. Stay posted for more updates on this case and True North Legal’s perspective on oral arguments in forthcoming podcasts. 

You can read more about this example and the entire case in True North Legal’s brief HERE.

Today, True North Legal filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court, along with Kansas Family Voice, representing Minnesota Family Council and thirty-two other family policy groups across the country in Free Speech Coalition, Inc v. Paxton.

This case involves a legal challenge to a Texas age verification law which creates online safeguards and protections for children against the pornography industry. Increasing access to technology demands protecting children from tech giants who have done little to shield children and arguably prey on innocent minds.

As reflected in our brief, studies show that online pornography is more accessible now than ever before, and in the very least, children are stumbling on to it by accident.

Our amicus brief argues in support of the Texas age verification law, explaining the studies that show the harmful effects of online pornography on children and it’s addictive nature, as well as the legislative authority to pass these laws that have been enacted across the country with bipartisan support. 

True North Legal says “No”, and that’s why we engaged in a pivotal case this week in the Minnesota Supreme Court.

True North Legal submitted an amicus brief this week, also representing Minnesota Family Council and the National Legal Foundation, in support of female athletes in the Cooper v. USA Powerlifting & USA Powerlifting Minnesota, case. The case, which will be heard by the Minnesota Supreme Court, is extremely important in the fight to ensure that the hard-fought gains of female athletes in all sports and at all levels of competition are not erased. Women deserve a safe and fair playing field, especially in strength competitions like female powerlifting. True North Legal’s brief details how Minnesota law, including the Minnesota Human Rights Act, requires that female athletics be reserved for female athletes, and speaks to the avalanche of evidence and data regarding the necessity to protect women-only sports categories. Most significantly, the brief incorporates data from the recently published UN Report cataloging the necessity of allowing sex-based distinctions in sport — in other words, women should compete against biological women in female-only categories. Women should not be forced to compete against transgender women, male-bodied athletes, in female athletic competitions. 

Yes, it really is (and should be) that simple. And if you don’t take our word for it, consider the number of NCAA teams forfeiting games because they refuse to risk their health and safety by competing against a team with a biological male athlete, identifying as female. Read True North Legal’s brief here and stay posted for more updates on this case in our upcoming Family Beacon Podcast. 

(Minnetonka, MN) – The Upper Midwest Law Center (UMLC) and co-counsel True North Legal (TNL) have filed an appeal to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States District Court’s decision yesterday to deny the motion for a preliminary injunction in its case to reinstate Plaintiff Anthony Schmitt’s highly successful Christian rehabilitation program at the Minnesota Correctional Facility – St. Cloud. UMLC argues that this termination has unjustly deprived prisoners of a proven and transformative resource solely because of the DOC’s ideological opposition to normal Christian beliefs which have existed for millennia.

For over a decade, the entirely voluntary program led by plaintiff Anthony Schmitt and his team provided a lifeline for male inmates, helping them to rehabilitate and reintegrate into society by teaching principles of authentic manhood through Christian teachings. The program’s success is undeniable. It graduated more than a thousand inmates, and scores of inmates reported restored family relationships, resolved personal conflicts, and significant personal growth as a result of their participation.

However, in July 2023, the DOC abruptly canceled the program, citing its “direct conflict with the diversity, equity, and inclusivity values of the DOC” because it defined manhood through a “biblical lens.” This decision was conveyed to Schmitt in an email from DOC Assistant Commissioner Jolene Rebertus, effectively ending a program that had become a cornerstone of inmate rehabilitation in the facility.

Schmitt argues that the DOC’s actions are not only discriminatory but also a blatant violation of his First Amendment rights as well as the rights of the inmates. By terminating the program, the DOC has deprived prisoners of a critical rehabilitative service based solely on ideological opposition to its Christian foundation.

“The DOC has sacrificed the well-being of prisoners on the altar of left-wing secular religion. This program was not just successful—it was life-changing for the inmates who participated. Canceling it because it is rooted in Christian beliefs is a grave injustice.” said James Dickey, Senior Counsel at UMLC. “It is absurd that the DOC is openly discriminating against mainstream views of human sexuality shared across every major theistic faith tradition. We are committed to seeing this case through at the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to restore this vital resource to the prisoners who desperately need it as soon as possible.”

“If the DOC and the Walz administration are truly committed to ‘freedom,’ as they claim, then Minnesota inmates deserve the freedom to choose to engage in a voluntary faith-based program that has set many inmates on a path to recovery,” said Renee Carlson, General Counsel at True North Legal. “The DOC’s actions are standing in the way of that freedom, denying inmates access to a program with proven results because the program is founded in principles consistent with millennia of Christian tradition and does not conform to secular government religion of the day.”

UMLC and TNL are seeking declarations from the courts that the DOC’s actions violate the federal and Minnesota constitutions and are demanding the reinstatement of the Christian rehabilitation program.

Click here to view the decision on the motion for a preliminary injunction from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. 

Click here to view UMLC and TNL’s appeal. 

Today, Rep. Barbara Ehardt of Idaho, author and principal sponsor of the Idaho Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, which was enacted on March 30, 2020, filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court supporting the state of Idaho in Hecox v. Little asking the court to grant certiorari in the case. She was joined by fifty-five female state legislators and thirty-four family policy organizations across the country, including the Idaho Family Policy Center who helped the law pass through the Idaho legislature. All of these legislators and organizations have authored, sponsored, introduced, supported, or advocated legislation defining eligibility for women’s sports based on biological criteria,

The Fairness in Women’s Sports Act was passed to keep other female athletes from facing unfair competitions as was the case in Idaho prior to the law’s enactment. Shortly after the law was passed, the ACLU sued the state of Idaho claiming the law is unconstitutional because it does not allow transgender females — males who identify as females — to play in female only sports. The case has made its way up through the federal courts, and most recently, a panel for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held the law unconstitutional.

The amici represented in this brief are legislators and policy organizations that championed Fairness in Women’s Sports laws or similar laws that protect women and girls’ athletic opportunities. These legislators and family policy organizations understand that the consequences of mandating a gender-identity criterion for participation in women’s sports would fundamentally change and erase women’s and girl’s sports altogether. This means years of hard fought gains and future opportunities for young girls would no longer remain. Moreover, legislators across the country who authored and co-authored these bills believe it is their responsibility and duty to protect the opportunities of women and girls in their respective states by enacting legislation like the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act that was passed in Idaho. Amici understand that girls’ athletic opportunities are some of the most formative and impactful times in a young girl’s or young women’s life, where experiences on the court or in the field foster enduring leadership qualities and character development. Amici believe all girls and women deserve that opportunity.

“Title IX changed my life. People need to understand that the opportunities that I had growing up were incredibly limited. I was eight years old when Title IX passed in 1972. But I kept my hope alive, continued to practice and ended up achieving my goal of both playing (Idaho State) and coaching Division I Women’s basketball at four fantastic institutions (UC Santa Barbara, BYU, Washington State and as the head coach at Cal State Fullerton).  It is through these experiences that I worked hard to pave a better path forward for those who would follow.  After years of work and witnessing huge growth for girls and woman in sports, it is devastating to watch us go backwards and, once again, have all of the female opportunities be based on what males need first. It began as what was best for men and we’re back to what’s best for men. This is terribly disappointing.” said Amicus Rep. Ehardt, former Division I NCAA basketball player and coach, and current coach for various clinics and travel teams for high-level high-school basketball prospects.

“Female athletes of all ages deserve a level playing field. Allowing men who identify as women to compete in women’s sports is hijacking more than podiums and scholarships. It’s taking away opportunities to learn valuable life lessons, develop character, and to build confidence, all of which are often the additional benefits of many female athletes,” said Renee Carlson, General Counsel for True North Legal and co-author of the brief.  

“For over fifty years the nation has recognized the need for and celebrated the achievement of women in sports. There is broad consensus on this topic across ideological and political lines. Women deserve the opportunity to compete on a level playing field. These laws, like the ones passed in Idaho and Kansas, recognize the biological reality that embodied athletes play sports, not identities. These laws simply say that where biology makes a competitive difference, it should be respected. Courts must uphold these realities if we are going to continue to see the advancements that we are seeing today in women’s sports. We will continue to stand for women and girls,” said Brittany Jones, General Counsel for Kansas Family Foundation and co-author of the brief.