Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s office is withholding every record it located in response to a FOIA request about the decision to quietly abandon a rule-making effort aimed at keeping males out of women’s and girls’ sports.
The Democratic governor’s office invoked executive privilege, attorney-client privilege and a state exemption for gubernatorial working papers and correspondence to deny access to the records concerning the withdrawal of an initiative advanced under her Republican predecessor, Glenn Youngkin.
“The volume of records being withheld is less than 100 documents, including many duplicates,” the office wrote. “The subject matter of the withheld records is correspondence and deliberative materials.”
SPANBERGER TAPS LGBTQ ACTIVIST WHO FOUGHT GIRLS’ BATHROOM PROTECTIONS FOR STATE BOARD
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger campaigns in Grottoes, Va., in September 2026. (Lyra Bordelon/Reuters)
“The withheld records are excluded from mandatory disclosure as working papers and correspondence of the Office of the Governor under Section 2.2-3705.7(2), and/or as attorney-client privileged under Section 2.2-3705.1(2),” the office added. “Your request also seeks information protected by executive privilege.”
The Virginia State Board of Health withdrew a petition that would have introduced protections for girls’ sports on July 30. The effort sought restrictions on male participation in organized female athletic teams and competitions, along with access to designated female spaces where women or girls could be undressed.
OutKick’s original FOIA request sought emails from members of the governor’s office concerning the withdrawal, covering the period from Spanberger taking office through July 30.
OutKick subsequently submitted a narrower request seeking emails from employees other than the officials specifically identified in the gubernatorial exemption.
That request also produced no records.
“In further response to your FOIA request, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3704(B)(3), please be advised that, based upon reasonable inquiry within the Office of the Governor, the requested records could not be found or do not exist,” the office wrote.
The rulemaking began with a petition filed in April 2025 by Réka György, Lily Mullens and Carter Satterfield. The Board of Health approved that petition 14–0 in August 2025.
Youngkin’s administration subsequently advanced the notice of intended regulatory action, which cleared gubernatorial review Oct. 28, 2025. It was published Nov. 17, and the public comment period ended Dec. 17.
SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY OUTKICK NEWSLETTER
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger signs executive orders. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
The initiative remained at that preliminary stage when it was withdrawn under Spanberger.
The formal withdrawal notice, published in the Virginia Register of Regulations Aug. 24, offered a brief explanation.
“Upon review of statutory authority, the State Board of Health is not proceeding with this regulatory action,” it said.
The original agency background document cited Virginia’s public health statutes as the basis for proceeding. However, it also identified the health department’s enforcement authority and capacity as issues to be considered while developing the regulations.
Spanberger publicly defended the decision in September in an interview with Radio IQ.
“There’s no legal authority to move forward with rulemaking and prior administrations may have tried to create lanes, and we’re not doing that,” she said.
Virginia law allows the governor’s office to withhold qualifying correspondence and records prepared for designated officials’ personal or deliberative use. The exemption is discretionary unless another law prohibits disclosure.
Its reach can include records written by lower-level employees for protected officials, meaning an employee’s job title alone does not determine whether a record must be released.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
State law also requires disclosure of nonexempt portions of records when an exclusion does not cover their entire contents. The office’s response did not describe whether any records or attachments could be released in part.