Multiple curricula can satisfy the same standards, at least on paper if not in practice. So states are, more or less, free to teach things how they want. However, they're also strongly driven by the textbook industry, which turns on the two biggest textbook purchasers: Texas and California. So a lot of the textbooks (and associated curriculum material) available for purchase in the rest of the states are driven by whatever those two states are pushing.
Very much so! The US didn’t have a Department of Education until the 90s.
Though "90s" is delightfully vague. You're either off by nearly 1800 years, you're very old and meant 1890s and were only off by a few years, or you really meant the 1990s and were off by nearly 130 years.
Today, if you aren’t in an honors geometry section, you likely learn a handwavy version of two-column proofs and do some pretty linear proofs that way. No symbolic logic, no mathematical writing.
I think the high school level “geometry” class—which may be the only one named such, but primary school math is full of geometry—is an atrophied organ left over from when it was still common to teach directly from Euclid, which is why it tends be about introducing proofs more than covering new abilities and techniques in geometry (though it may cover some of that, too)