California attorney Julie Hamill appeared on CNN Friday for a live interview with anchor Brianna Keilar to discuss the ongoing controversy surrounding a high school athlete, AB Hernandez, a biological male who identifies as female and is set to compete in the California state girls’ track and field championship this weekend.
Hernandez, a junior athlete, has drawn public attention after qualifying for multiple girls’ events in the championship meet.
The athlete’s participation has reignited debate over fairness in high school sports and how federal education policy intersects with state competition rules regarding transgender athletes.
Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?
During the segment, Keilar asked Hamill what a fair solution would look like for athletes competing against Hernandez.
“What would make this fair for her to compete, for those who are competing against her? What would that kind of structure in competition look like?” Keilar asked.
Hamill responded by asking for clarity on the subject of the question. “Who is her?” she asked.
“AB, AB…” Keilar responded.
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
“Okay, AB Hernandez is a male who identifies as a female,” Hamill said.
“What would be fair is to have Hernandez competing in the male category. It is not fair for the females competing to have to compete with a male.”
The exchange then shifted to the broader issue of federal funding and the implications of state noncompliance with Title IX.
President Donald Trump has stated that schools failing to comply with federal definitions under Title IX could risk losing federal funds.
Keilar posed the question, “So, in Trump’s federal funding threat, is that something that would hurt all student athletes who are assigned female at birth?”
“Would his federal funding threat hurt athletes?” Hamill asked, reiterating the question.
“If the money is taken away,” Keilar clarified.
“Right, so the law actually says that schools that do not abide [by] Title IX or other federal laws cannot receive federal funds. So that’s not Trump’s fault. The problem is with the state,” Hamill replied.
Keilar pressed further, saying, “But you understand, Julie, you understand there’s two views here on Title IX… if you are taking away the funds for athletes, student athletes in California, isn’t that going to hurt all of them?”
Hamill responded, “Taking away federal funds is going to hurt all California kids, which is why the State of California needs to comply with federal law.”
Keilar then turned the conversation back to Hernandez’s participation.
“So there are obviously clear benefits to playing sports, to competing in sports, so when you’re looking at an athlete like AB Hernandez, what would you have her do so that she can benefit from sporting?”
Hamill replied, “I view AB Hernandez as the victim in this situation. I feel for him, and I feel that he has been lied to for his entire life, and it’s probably very destabilizing and difficult for him right now to realize that what he has been told is not actually reality. He cannot become a girl. What he can do is compete in the male category…”
Keilar interjected, “Julie, can we stick to sports? Let’s stick to the sports. So you say compete in the male category or what?”
Hamill stated that if California wanted to explore the option of creating a separate transgender athletic division, it could do so, but added that requiring girls to compete against biological males was not a lawful or fair solution.
Shortly after that exchange, Keilar ended the segment.
.@hamill_law’s faces here are too much. She will not give this woman an inch. Nor should she. Watch! It’s amazing! pic.twitter.com/xdgACJhG7z
— Jennifer Sey (@JenniferSey) May 30, 2025
The conversation comes as California faces increasing scrutiny over its compliance with federal education policies.
The Biden-Harris administration previously reversed Trump-era Title IX guidance on transgender participation, while the Trump administration has signaled a return to prior interpretations of Title IX that define sex based on biological characteristics.
Hernandez’s participation in the girls’ division of the state championships is scheduled to proceed as planned on Saturday.
As of Friday evening, neither the California Interscholastic Federation nor school officials had issued additional comments in response to the segment.
Connect with Vetted Off-Duty Cops to Instantly Fulfill Your Security Needs
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of RVM News. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.
Here’s the deal. Mediocre male athletes are pretending to be female so that they can dominate in their preferred sport. See Will “Lia” Thomas, who ranked somewhere around 347 in the men’s swimming division before announcing he was a female, to obliterate his female opponents. If they create a “transgender” division, then all of those mediocre male athletes will have to perform against other mediocre males and will lose their advantage against their opponents.
If the Democrats get their way, there will be huge numbers of transitionies– plenty to form their own leagues.
On Planet Earth there are 2 genders, male and female, those that disagree need mental help!!!!!!!
I would clarify there are two SEXES. Gender is for language. SEX is the scientific term.
An ancient Oriental wise man observed that a society begins to decay when it ceases to call things by their right names.
This interview is a very nice, compact case study on what is wrong with public discourse. It boils down to improper use of language, people using words that are not correct, leading to thinking that is confused and conversation that is unproductive This chat starts with the pronoun thing, but there is more.
For example, “Trump’s federal funding threat.” It’s not a threat. It is what the law as written obliges. “the law actually says that schools that do not abide [by] Title IX or other federal laws cannot receive federal funds.” An elected official honoring his oath to enforce the law is deemed a threat by the interviewer. That is a way to frame things that is not correct or useful.
For example. “you are taking away the funds for athletes.” No, neither Mr. Trump nor the feds generally are taking away anything. There are no funds if you don’t comply with the rules for getting funds. That is not taking them away. But the original “taking away” framing of the issue is slanted, makes it sound mean and vengeful.
“Thank you so much for being with us, we appreciate you handing our asses to us here at CNN.”