A Texas town disbanded its diversity committee following a protest march by the Proud Boys

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

But was the diversity committee merely a façade from the start?

When the municipal government of Frisco, Texas, issued its first-ever Pride declaration in June 2022, the moment garnered attention for an unexpected reason: it attracted the Proud Boys.

The far-right extremist group, known for its violent opposition to LGBTQ+ expression—particularly drag shows and Pride events—targeted the occasion. In Frisco, members of the Proud Boys harassed a prominent organizer, following him and other supporters to a celebratory gathering at a local restaurant after the proclamation.

Justin Culpepper, 36, co-founder of the nonprofit Pride Frisco alongside his spouse, recounted that the Proud Boys had threatened to physically assault him. “I went into the restaurant, and the people who worked there protected me,” he recalled.

Jon Culpepper, 45, described the event as “traumatic,” but Justin Culpepper has been reluctant to discuss it with the media, fearing that it would give undue attention to the extremists. Instead, Justin reserved most of his criticism for the lack of response from the police and city government. He told LGBTQ Nation, “When you bring these concerns to the city council and the police chief, the reaction is to erase LGBTQ people or minimize our existence to avoid provoking the Proud Boys, rather than asking, ‘Why the f**k do we have Proud Boys in our city, and what are we doing about it?’”

He continued, “Why hasn’t the mayor or city council denounced these people or their actions? Even if they don’t, why not elevate positive things, like a Pride proclamation?”

In contrast to other communities that have responded to far-right group incursions with condemnation and displays of unity, Frisco has taken a different path. Since the incident, not only has the city government refused to officially acknowledge Pride again, but they have also dismantled much of their previous diversity initiative. According to the Culpeppers, the city only supported them when it was politically convenient. Now, under pressure from Texas Republicans and following a broader national trend, Frisco’s leaders appear to be sweeping the LGBTQ+ community under the rug.

“When it comes to LGBTQ people, Frisco politicians act like we have cooties,” Justin remarked. “They don’t want to be seen with us in public or be on record supporting our positions, out of fear it’ll be used against them.”

Part of the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, Frisco has grown to over 200,000 residents, often ranking as one of the fastest-growing cities in the U.S. Pride Frisco, which hosted its first annual Pride event in 2022, has garnered around 5,000 supporters from the region, reflecting the area’s increasing diversity. The Culpeppers moved to Frisco in 2018 and founded Pride Frisco three years later. In addition to their LGBTQ+ advocacy, the couple runs a real estate brokerage and property management business. Jon is a licensed real estate broker and co-owner of an IT software consulting firm.

The Culpeppers explained that Pride Frisco offers crucial support to LGBTQ+ individuals who may not have easy access to Dallas’s urban core. Since its inception, the organization has focused on providing regular events that go beyond the annual Pride celebration, including gender marker and name change clinics for transgender residents. Their long-term goal is to persuade Frisco to help establish a physical LGBTQ+ resource center.

“We look at the unmet needs of the community,” Justin said, emphasizing the importance of education for those new to LGBTQ+ life. “The fundamental thing you need is good information, because that empowers decision-makers.”

Despite Pride Frisco’s rapid growth, official recognition from Frisco’s government has been inconsistent, and at times, even misleading.

In 2020, Mayor Jeff Cheney launched the Mayor’s Inclusion Committee, eventually inviting Justin to join. Like many cities eager to show their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) after nationwide civil rights protests, Frisco’s initial enthusiasm was short-lived. The Inclusion Committee was soon plagued by internal disputes, and when Justin suggested supporting DEI initiatives in Frisco’s public schools, he was told to “keep the chat focused on Frisco Inclusion work.”

According to Jon, the committee lacked real power and was merely a tool for the city to display its commitment to diversity when convenient. For instance, the Inclusion Committee was listed in the region’s successful 2022 bid to host FIFA Soccer for the 2026 World Cup.

“They used the committee to show they were working on diversity,” Jon said, “but now they’re quietly trying to get rid of it.”

By 2023, the city’s token support for diversity, including the Pride proclamation, was fading, especially as DEI initiatives faced mounting pressure from Texas Republicans. When Pride Frisco applied for another proclamation in 2023, the city cited a new rule preventing repeat proclamations within the same year. In 2024, procedural excuses were used again to deny the proclamation, even though the city continues to recognize events like Bicycle Month and Garden Week annually.

A public information request revealed the Inclusion Committee had no formal meeting minutes or complete list of members, leading many to believe the committee was never officially recognized by the Frisco City Council. It existed only as a façade, disappearing after the Proud Boys march in the city.

“We’ve seen this across the country,” said Callie Butcher, a Dallas-based attorney involved in LGBTQ+ rights cases. “There’s a political movement against diversity, equity, and inclusion, often targeting equity.”

This trend extends beyond Texas. Other cities, like Rowlett, have faced similar battles over DEI commissions, and the issue has become part of a larger national attack on DEI efforts, led by Republican lawmakers. Texas recently passed S.B. 17, banning DEI offices at state-run universities, echoing similar legislation in states like Florida and North Carolina.

Sarah Kate Ellis, CEO and President of GLAAD, highlighted the damaging impact of such efforts. “Instead of erasing our efforts, they should be uplifted,” she said. “Frisco is not only erasing DEI initiatives but ignoring the contributions of local LGBTQ organizers.”

While Texas’ new law doesn’t directly affect city-run DEI committees, it has created an environment where city governments feel pressured to distance themselves from anything resembling DEI.

In May 2023, Frisco City Council replaced the Inclusion Committee with a new Frisco Multicultural Committee, under the arts department. The proclamation for this new committee made no mention of the LGBTQ+ community, raising further concerns.

Despite this, Pride Frisco remains committed to advocating for an LGBTQ+ community center and is preparing for the next Pride festival at Frisco’s Toyota Stadium on October 6.

Transgender teens file lawsuit against New Hampshire to challenge sports ban

New Hampshire recently passed a series of anti-trans laws, and now the community is pushing back.

Last Friday, two New Hampshire teenagers, both soccer players who have identified as girls since childhood, filed a lawsuit against the state challenging its transgender sports ban. With support from the ACLU, the lawsuit argues that the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX, a 1972 amendment ensuring equal opportunities in education based on sex.

The lawsuit further states that the plaintiffs are seeking a restraining order against the defendants, along with a request for a temporary injunction on the bill, to allow the girls to return to playing sports while the case is being decided.

Chris Erchull, senior staff attorney with GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), emphasized in a statement, “Sports are a crucial part of education in New Hampshire public schools, offering numerous benefits such as physical and mental health, leadership development, and social growth. The state cannot justify excluding transgender girls and denying them these important educational opportunities available to other students.”

H.B. 1205, signed into law last month by Gov. Chris Sununu (R), prohibits transgender girls from participating on girls’ sports teams throughout high school. The bill was enacted alongside two other anti-trans laws, while a fourth bill aimed at overturning the state’s anti-discrimination protections for trans individuals was vetoed by the governor.

The lawsuit names the Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Education, members of the New Hampshire Board of Education, and the girls’ high school school board as defendants. The plaintiffs are represented by Chris Erchull and Ben Klein from GLAD, Henry Klementowicz and Gilles Bissonnette from the ACLU of New Hampshire, and Louis Lobel, Kevin DeJong, and Elaine Blais from Goodwin.

Henry Klementowicz, Deputy Legal Director of the ACLU of New Hampshire, stated, “H.B. 1205 discriminates against and stigmatizes transgender girls, sending the message that they are unworthy of the same educational opportunities as other girls. All students thrive when they have access to resources that support their mental, emotional, and physical well-being, and transgender girls deserve the same access.”

Alleged Assault at Shake Shack: Gay Man Reportedly Beaten After Kissing His Boyfriend

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

A video of the incident shows the disturbing assault, with multiple men stomping and kicking the victim as he defensively curls into a fetal position.

A gay man in Washington, D.C., was allegedly assaulted by a group of Shake Shack employees in Dupont Circle after sharing a kiss with his boyfriend while waiting for their food. The incident occurred on Saturday when 28-year-old Christian Dingus, a D.C. resident, attempted to defuse a confrontation between an employee who had objected to the kiss and his boyfriend, who was upset by the employee’s remark.

While we were back there in the restaurant — just for a moment — we began to kiss,” Dingus told NBC News. “At that point, a worker approached us and said, ‘You can’t be doing that here, can’t do that type of stuff here.

Dingus’ boyfriend defended their actions, stating they had done nothing wrong, which led to the two men being escorted outside. As tensions escalated, Dingus told an employee not to speak disrespectfully to his boyfriend. It was then that the Shake Shack employees allegedly began attacking him.

“One of the men forcefully pushed me on my shoulder,” Dingus recalled. “Next thing I know, that seemed to spark the rest of them. They all just started attacking me, dragging me across the floor and continuously punching me in the head.”

A video taken by another patron captured the assault, showing Dingus being knocked to the ground and assaulted by several men, who are then seen running outside to continue the attack.

“There was a clear desire to be violent towards me, and I think it’s very evident in the video,” Dingus remarked.

Dingus explained that after being thrown to the ground, he curled up into a “fetal position” and waited for the attack to end. While he wasn’t sure who stopped the beating, a woman dining at Shake Shack came to his aid, and the person who recorded the video offered it to him.

The incident is being investigated as a hate crime, with police classifying it as a simple assault with an anti-gay bias, according to the Metropolitan Police Department’s report.

A Shake Shack spokesperson stated that all employees involved were suspended pending further review. “We are aware of the incident on Saturday, Aug. 17, at our Dupont Circle location and are taking it very seriously,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “At Shake Shack, the safety and well-being of our guests and team members are our top priority, and we have a zero-tolerance policy for any form of violence.” The company is committed to taking appropriate action based on the findings.

Though an ambulance arrived on the scene, Dingus declined to take it. Later that day, after experiencing severe pain in his jaw, he visited the emergency room, where he was diagnosed with a concussion and trauma to his jaw. The emotional impact of the assault has also been significant.

“You hear all the time that this stuff happens, but I had started to believe it didn’t,” Dingus shared. “I’d been thinking of progress and how great the community is here, and for that to all be shattered like this—it really sucks.”

Read more.

Appeals Court, with Judges Appointed by Trump, Overturns Transgender Worker’s Legal Victory

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

She initially won her case after her employer refused to cover her healthcare, but that decision has since been overturned.

This blog originally appeared at

An anti-trans discrimination ruling from Georgia in May has been nullified by an appeals court, with half of its judges appointed by former President Donald Trump.

The case involves a transgender deputy who was denied equal medical care after the Houston County Sheriff’s Office refused to cover her gender-affirming care through their health insurance policy. This decision follows the county’s expenditure of $1.2 million in legal fees to avoid covering the deputy’s $10,000 surgery.

Sgt. Anna Lange, represented by the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund (TLDEF), filed her lawsuit in 2019 after her employer refused to provide coverage for her gender-affirming care, despite her having worked for the Sheriff’s Office since 2006.

In 2022, a federal judge from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia ruled that Sgt. Lange had been illegally discriminated against, referencing the 2020 Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which determined that anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination falls under sex-based discrimination prohibited by Title VII.

While a three-judge panel from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Lange’s favor in May, the full court later ordered the case to be reheard, vacating the prior decision after Houston County appealed. A date for the new ruling has yet to be set.

In the 2022 case, Lange was awarded $60,000. This latest ruling will have significant implications for transgender individuals in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.

Six of the 12 judges on the court were appointed by Donald Trump, making it one of the most conservative appeals courts in the country.

The panel’s decision in May stated, “Because transgender persons are the only (insurance) plan participants who qualify for gender-affirming surgery, the (county’s) plan denies health care coverage based on transgender status.”

It also concluded, “Houston County deprived Lange of a benefit or privilege of her employment by reason of her nonconforming traits, thereby unlawfully punishing her for her gender nonconformity.”

Paxton files lawsuit against Biden administration over transgender worker protections

This blog originally appeared at The Hill.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) has once again filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration, this time targeting federal protections for transgender employees in the workplace.

The lawsuit, submitted Thursday in federal court, is directed at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Justice Department (DOJ). It challenges the legality of agency guidelines that define workplace harassment under federal law, seeking a permanent injunction to prevent their enforcement.

The EEOC guidelines, though not legally binding, assert that denying employees accommodations based on their gender identity—such as misgendering transgender workers or denying them access to gender-appropriate restrooms—constitutes unlawful workplace harassment.

In Thursday’s lawsuit, Paxton, alongside the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, claimed the opposite. “The Biden-Harris Administration is once again attempting to rewrite federal law through undemocratic and illegal agency action,” Paxton stated. “This time, they are unlawfully weaponizing the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to force private businesses and States to adopt ‘transgender’ mandates—Texas is suing to stop them.”

The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Texas’s Amarillo Division, where U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, presides over most cases. Last month, Kacsmaryk dismissed Paxton’s request to block an earlier version of the EEOC guidance, stating that a new complaint was required.

The EEOC declined to comment, referring inquiries to the DOJ, which did not immediately respond. Paxton, a vocal critic of progressive LGBTQ protections, has filed numerous lawsuits against the Biden administration since 2021, with most being directed to Kacsmaryk, according to the Texas Tribune.

Read more.

Elon Musk’s role in stirring unrest in Britain was just a preview. Look at what he has in store for America

This blog originally appeared at SUPPORT THE GUARDIAN.

The presidential election is just three months away. What if the billionaire disputes the outcome? What if he concludes that democracy no longer holds value?

Just over three years ago, an insurrectionist mob connected online, gathered in Washington, stormed the Capitol, and threatened the vice-president with a noose. But those were the “good old days.” We’re now in a different reality—one where billionaires are no longer restrained.

Back in 2020, tech platforms, still reeling from public backlash, at least pretended to care. Twitter had more than 4,000 employees in “trust and safety,” focused on removing dangerous content and monitoring foreign influence. Facebook, despite resisting pressure, eventually banned political ads that aimed to undermine voting, while researchers worked to identify and flag harmful disinformation.

Despite vast numbers of Americans believing the 2020 election was stolen, and a violent mob nearly staging a coup, things have only worsened in the four years since.

While Kamala Harris is enjoying her “hot girl summer” and liberal America breathes a sigh of relief, the U.S. should shift its gaze to Britain. There, rioters fill the streets, cars burn, and rampant racism spreads unchecked across multiple platforms. Lies, fueled by algorithms, circulate long before the truth emerges, only to be sanitized by politicians and media opportunists.

Just as Brexit foreshadowed Trump’s rise in 2016, Britain is once again a warning sign. The same patterns, tactics, and figures are appearing on both sides of the Atlantic—but now with even more dangerous technological weaknesses ready to be exploited.

For now, Britain’s streets are calm, and the violence suppressed. But in the U.S., where militias roam and open-carry laws are commonplace, the threat is much greater. No matter how well Harris performs in the polls, the U.S. is on the brink of an extraordinarily dangerous moment—no matter who wins the election.

As Trump and Bolsonaro have shown, it’s no longer just about winning elections or a single day. The period between election results and inauguration has become a volatile, anything-can-happen moment—not just for the U.S., but for the world.

In Britain, we’ve already seen the warning signs. This summer, we witnessed something unprecedented: a billionaire tech owner publicly challenging an elected leader, using his platform to undermine authority and incite violence. The 2024 summer riots in Britain were Elon Musk’s test run.

If Musk decides to “predict” a civil war in the U.S., what would that look like? He has already gotten away with it once. The sheer supranational power of this and the potential consequences should be terrifying. What happens if Musk contests an election result or deems democracy irrelevant? This isn’t science fiction—it’s a scenario just months away.

None of this is occurring in isolation. After 2016, there was a brief effort to understand how tech platforms had been exploited to spread lies and disinformation. But that moment has passed. A concerted, years-long effort by Republican operatives to politicize “misinformation” has succeeded. The term barely registers in U.S. tech circles today. Those who continue to raise the issue—academics, researchers, trust and safety teams—are labeled part of the “censorship industrial complex.”

A U.S. congressional committee led by Republican Jim Jordan, convinced that big tech silenced conservative voices, aggressively pursued emails from dozens of academics, chilling the entire field of research. Entire university departments, including the Stanford Internet Observatory’s election integrity unit, which played a key role in 2020, have collapsed.

Even the FBI was blocked from communicating with tech companies about an anticipated surge of foreign disinformation after a lawsuit from two attorneys general made its way to the Supreme Court. The New York Times reported that only recently has the FBI quietly resumed such efforts.

All of this has created the ideal conditions for tech platforms to quietly step back. Twitter—now X—has let go of at least half of its trust and safety team, but so have nearly all major tech companies. Thousands of employees once tasked with rooting out misinformation have been laid off by Meta, TikTok, Snap, and Discord.

Just last week, Facebook shut down one of its last transparency tools, CrowdTangle—a critical resource for understanding online activity during the tumultuous days surrounding the 2021 inauguration. Despite the protests of researchers and academics, Facebook axed it simply because they could.

Back in 2020, these efforts felt meager and inadequate against the growing threat. Now, they’ve disappeared just as the tools that spread misinformation are growing even more dangerous. OpenAI recently boasted about identifying an Iranian group that used ChatGPT for a U.S. election influence campaign, which might sound impressive if their trust and safety team hadn’t been disbanded in May after its co-founders resigned.

Musk, now the self-styled “Lord of Misrule,” has ripped off the pretense entirely. He’s shown that there’s no need to even act like you care. In his world, trust means mistrust, and safety means censorship. His goal is chaos—and it’s on the way.

(This article was amended on 22 August 2024 to correct a reference to the storming of the U.S. Capitol, which occurred just over three years ago, not four. The inauguration referenced should have been the 2021 inauguration, not 2020.)

Carole Cadwalladr, reporter and feature writer for the Observer

Read more.

Bulgaria’s New Anti-LGBTQ+ Law Takes Effect, Sparking Calls for EU Intervention

This blog originally appeared at POLITICO.

The legislation has sparked nationwide protests and drawn condemnation from human rights organizations.

On Friday, Bulgaria officially published the text of a contentious law banning LGBTQ+ “propaganda” in schools after President Rumen Radev declined to veto the bill. The amendment to the education code, introduced by the far-right, pro-Russian Revival party and unexpectedly supported by pro-European Union parties, prohibits the “propaganda, promotion, or incitement” of LGBTQ+ “ideas and views” in schools, though the specifics remain vague. The law passed with a significant majority in parliament on August 7, sparking protests across the country, including the most recent demonstration in front of the presidential palace on Thursday.

“This law isn’t just a Bulgarian issue; it’s a Russian law that has infiltrated the heart of Europe,” said Rémy Bonny, executive director of Forbidden Colours, an LGBTQ+ rights advocacy group, in an interview with POLITICO’s Brussels Playbook. He called on the European Commission to intervene and hold Bulgaria accountable.

Senior members of the European Parliament’s LGBTI Intergroup also urged action, sending a letter last week to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Equality Commissioner Helena Dalli. The letter implored the Commission to “urgently condemn” the new law.

“This law is a direct attack on the LGBTIQ+ community, particularly targeting children,” wrote group co-presidents Kim van Sparrentak from the Netherlands and Marc Angel from Luxembourg. “Such ‘anti-propaganda’ bills endanger children and youth by fostering a hostile environment where LGBTIQ+ children may face bullying, harassment, and increased health risks.”

In response, the European Commission confirmed that Commissioner Dalli had sent a letter on August 13 to Bulgarian Education and Science Minister Galin Tsokov, seeking more information about the legislation.

“The Commission remains unwavering in its commitment to addressing discrimination, inequalities, and the challenges faced by LGBTIQ individuals, including in education, as highlighted in our LGBTIQ Equality Strategy of November 2020,” a Commission spokesperson stated.

Human rights organizations, including Action, Buditelkite, Forbidden Colours, LevFem, Feminist Mobilisations, and Deystvie, have condemned the bill. A petition asking the Bulgarian president to veto the amendment garnered about 7,000 signatures, and academics have issued an open letter urging the same.

Kostadin Kostadinov, chairman of the Revival Party that introduced the legislation, hailed the adoption of the law as a “historic breakthrough” last week, declaring that “LGBT propaganda is anti-human and won’t be accepted in Bulgaria.”

Same-sex marriage remains unrecognized in Bulgaria, and the country has yet to ratify the Istanbul Convention, which aims to combat violence against women.

In 2024, Bulgaria was ranked the third-worst in the EU for LGBTQ+ rights protections, with only Romania and Poland scoring lower, according to ILGA-Europe, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group that annually evaluates the state of LGBTQ+ rights across Europe.

Bulgaria’s law mirrors similar legislation passed in Russia and Hungary in recent years, which also target LGBTQ+ rights. Georgia’s government has introduced a comparable draft law as well.

Bulgaria’s Ministry of Education, Ministry of Justice, and the prime minister’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The US Supreme Court denies protections for LGBT students in certain states

This blog originally appeared at REUTERS.

WASHINGTON, Aug 16 (Reuters) – On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to allow the Biden administration to enforce a significant portion of a new rule aimed at protecting LGBT students from discrimination based on gender identity in schools and colleges. This decision affects 10 Republican-led states that had challenged the rule.

The justices declined the administration’s request to partially lift lower court injunctions that had blocked the rule from being implemented under Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. As a result, the U.S. Education Department is unable to enforce the rule, which was announced in April and scheduled to take effect on Aug. 1, in Tennessee, Louisiana, and eight other states while litigation continues.

The Biden administration aimed to reinstate a crucial provision that clarifies that discrimination “on the basis of sex” includes sexual orientation and gender identity. Additionally, the rule contains several other provisions unrelated to gender identity.

The administration requested the Supreme Court’s emergency intervention in two lawsuits: one filed by Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Idaho, and multiple Louisiana school boards, and another brought by Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, West Virginia, and an association of Christian educators.

When the rule was announced, U.S. Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine Lhamon stated, “These final regulations clarify Title IX’s requirement that schools promptly and effectively address all forms of sex discrimination. We look forward to working with schools, students, and families to prevent and eliminate sex discrimination.”

On the other hand, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill criticized the rule as a federal overreach, arguing that it would undermine Title IX. She also condemned what she referred to as Biden’s “extreme gender ideology.”

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill criticized the federal rule as part of a political agenda that disregards significant safety concerns for young women in schools across the country. “This rule forces schools to change their behavior, language, and policies regarding private spaces for girls and women. It is enormously invasive and goes far beyond a mere suggestion; it is a mandate that well exceeds their statutory authority,” Murrill said when announcing the state’s lawsuit.

The plaintiffs, including the states, argued that the rule would compel schools to allow transgender students to use restrooms and locker rooms aligning with their gender identities, and require faculty to use the pronouns that correspond with those identities. These lawsuits are among several that have successfully blocked the rule in 22 states, nearly all Republican-governed, contending that the Biden administration is unlawfully rewriting a law originally designed over 50 years ago to protect women from discrimination in education.

On July 30, the administration achieved a victory when a federal judge in Alabama declined to block the rule in that state, as well as in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. However, the following day, the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily halted that ruling.

The Biden administration’s rule introduces numerous changes to regulations combating sex discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, extending protections to LGBT individuals and strengthening safeguards for pregnant students, parents, and guardians. The administration argued that protecting LGBT students under Title IX is a “straightforward application” of the Supreme Court’s landmark 2020 decision, which determined that a similar law, Title VII, prohibits workplace discrimination against gay and transgender employees.

However, U.S. Judge Terry Doughty in Monroe, Louisiana, and U.S. Judge Danny Reeves in Lexington, Kentucky, concluded that Title IX’s reference to sex pertains only to “biological” males and females, and that the Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling does not apply in this context.

The administration has emphasized that most of the rule does not concern gender identity and should be allowed to take effect. However, they agreed that two key provisions—one regarding restrooms and locker rooms and the other potentially involving the use of pronouns—could remain blocked while the appeals proceed.

Additionally, the administration clarified that the rule does not alter “existing requirements governing sex separation in athletics,” noting that this issue is subject to a “separate rulemaking.”

Both the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied requests to partially enforce the rule, leading the administration to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.

In June, the Supreme Court agreed to hear another case from Tennessee, involving a Republican-supported ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. The court is scheduled to hear that case in its next term, which begins in October.

Read more.

The emerging European cities drawing the attention of digital nomads

This blog originally appeared at EURONEWS.

By Amanda Kavanagh

Digital nomads are always seeking out new destinations that offer an ideal mix of affordability, high quality of life, convenient time zones, and reliable tech infrastructure.

While Lisbon has been a popular choice for international remote workers in recent years, this influx has contributed to rising rent prices. Additionally, some of the initiatives that initially attracted digital nomads are being rolled back by Portuguese authorities, such as the termination of the non-habitual tax residence (NHR) program.

With these changes, digital nomads are on the hunt for the next hot spot.

3 Jobs in Germany to Consider This Week:

  1. Lackiermeister (m/w/d), Rheinmetall Landsysteme GmbH, Fuldabrück
  2. Abteilungsleiter Obst & Gemüse (m/w/d), REWE Deutscher Supermarkt, Schwerin
  3. Account Manager (f/d/m), Leica Biosystems, Dulmen

New Destinations for Tech Workers

In March, New Zealand’s Trade & Enterprise, a government agency, released a report titled Tech Jobs in Europe. Originally aimed at helping New Zealand exporters understand top and emerging tech hubs across Europe, the report offers valuable insights for remote workers looking for their next destination. Although the data primarily comes from secondary sources, providing more general trends than definitive conclusions, it still offers a useful guide for digital nomads.

For most European cities, internet quality and time zone compatibility with European jobs are solid. That narrows the focus to two key considerations: quality of life and cost of living—both of which are analyzed in the report.

The report’s cost of living index compares the prices of consumer goods, such as groceries, dining, transportation, and utilities, relative to New York City. Meanwhile, the quality of life index considers factors like purchasing power, pollution levels, housing affordability, safety, healthcare quality, commute times, and climate conditions to estimate overall quality of life.

Spain

Spain emerges as an attractive option for digital nomads, offering the lowest cost of living index among the countries studied, paired with the third-highest quality of life index, and, of course, abundant sunshine. The report highlights several Spanish cities, including Bilbao, Barcelona, Madrid, and Valencia.

Barcelona, known for its dynamic start-up scene and vibrant nightlife, has long been a favorite among digital nomads. However, its struggles with over-tourism have been well-documented, and expats may not always receive the warmest welcome.

Valencia is quickly becoming a favorite among remote workers. This coastal city offers a more affordable cost of living compared to Barcelona or Madrid, yet still boasts excellent infrastructure and a high quality of life. With its stunning beaches and rich cultural heritage, Valencia is the perfect place for those who prioritize work-life balance.

For those who want to immerse themselves in Spanish culture and experience a vibrant nightlife, Madrid is the place to be. The city is a hub for the tech industry and has introduced a Start-up Law aimed at attracting entrepreneurs. This law also grants remote workers and freelancers from outside the European Union the right to stay in Spain for an initial period of one year, making Madrid an attractive option.

Up north, Bilbao offers a unique experience with its blend of traditional Basque culture and incredible cuisine. It’s an ideal destination for those looking for a more authentic and less touristy experience.

Sweden

Sweden stands out in both the cost of living and quality of life indexes, making it a compelling choice for digital nomads who are comfortable with the northern climate. The report highlights Malmö and Stockholm as key cities for tech and innovation, offering a dynamic environment for remote workers.

Stockholm has established itself as a major tech hub, with success stories like Spotify and Klarna originating from the city. It’s a magnet for those in the tech industry, offering a dynamic environment and ample opportunities.

However, Malmö is gaining attention as well. Just a short train ride from Copenhagen, Malmö provides a more affordable alternative to Stockholm while still offering a vibrant tech community and an excellent quality of life.

Italy

Who hasn’t been tempted by those enticing ads offering historic buildings in rural Italy for almost nothing?

Unfortunately, high-quality internet isn’t always a given in those rural areas. The New Zealand report, therefore, focuses on Milan, Turin, and Rome. These cities offer a relatively low cost of living, a moderate quality of life, and reliable internet speeds, making them more suitable for digital nomads.

While Rome’s historic charm is hard to resist, Milan is emerging as Italy’s top tech and business destination. Known for its fashion and design heritage, Milan is now also home to a growing start-up scene, with companies like Scalapay, a payment solution that lets customers make purchases in three interest-free installments, leading the charge.

Turin, often overlooked by tourists, is another Italian city worth considering. Known for its innovation, particularly in the automotive industry with brands like Fiat, Alfa Romeo, and New Holland, Turin is now undergoing significant urban and industrial redevelopment. The city is positioning itself as a strategic center for excellence in the aerospace industry.

The Netherlands

The Netherlands boasts the highest quality of life index among the countries examined. While the cost of living is moderate, the overall appeal of the country remains strong for digital nomads. The report highlights cities such as Amsterdam, Utrecht, The Hague, and Rotterdam.

Amsterdam, with its iconic canals and progressive culture, has long been a favorite among tech workers. However, as housing prices in the capital continue to rise, other Dutch cities like Utrecht, The Hague, and Rotterdam are becoming increasingly attractive alternatives.

Utrecht, with its large student population and central location, provides a more relaxed alternative for digital nomads seeking a laid-back atmosphere. The Hague, renowned for its international organizations and stunning beaches, is particularly appealing to those in law, policy, or international relations.

Rotterdam, famous for its bustling port and ambitious plans to become Europe’s largest green hydrogen hub, is also gaining popularity. The city is known for its founder-led communities, a high concentration of start-ups, numerous incubators, and an abundance of coworking spaces, making it an attractive destination for entrepreneurs.

Germany

Germany strikes a good balance between cost of living and quality of life, making it an appealing choice for digital nomads. The report highlights Hamburg, Berlin, and Munich as key cities.

Berlin has long been a hotspot for digital nomads, celebrated for its affordable living costs and its vibrant arts and techno scene. However, as Berlin’s popularity grows, so do its living expenses, prompting many to explore other German cities.

Hamburg, with its rich maritime history, offers a unique flavor of German city life. The city is home to the carbon-neutral energy systems provider and unicorn 1KOMMA5°, along with several innovative and high-profile tech companies in biotech, health tech, and fintech sectors.

3 More Jobs to Apply for This Week:

  1. Senior Project Manager (m/f/d), Cytiva, Darmstadt
  2. Regional Sales Manager Germany Central (f/m/d), Beckman Coulter, Diagnostics, Frankfurt
  3. Frontend Developer, Jobbio, Dublin / Remote

Munich, though more expensive, makes up for it with a high quality of life, close proximity to the Alps, and a robust job market. Known traditionally for its engineering prowess, Munich is now shifting its focus towards software engineering, with 11% of Germany’s total start-ups located in the city.

Oklahoma ranked among the top 10 worst states to live in, according to a new study: Check out the full list

This blog originally appeared at THE OKLAHOMAN.

In a 2024 study by WalletHub ranking the best states to live in, Oklahoma was placed as the 7th-worst.

The personal finance company evaluated each state using 51 key indicators of livability, ranging from housing costs and income growth to education levels and the quality of hospital systems.

Here’s how Oklahoma measured up:

Oklahoma ranks as the 7th-worst state to live in. Overall, Oklahoma came in 44th in the study ranking the best states to live in.

Here’s where the state stood on some key indicators:

  • 49th in percentage of insured population
  • 45th in income growth
  • 43rd in percentage of population in poverty
  • 43rd in percentage of adults in fair or poor health
  • 42nd in average weekly work hours
  • 38th in homeownership rate
  • 25th in restaurants per capita

Top 10 Best States to Live In
WalletHub analyst Cassandra Happe emphasized that financial factors should be a primary consideration when choosing where to live. She also noted that while many states boast strong economies, it’s crucial to consider other aspects, such as the potential impact on one’s health and safety.

Massachusetts Ranked as the Best State to Live In

The study named Massachusetts the top state to live in, with WalletHub analyst Cassandra Happe attributing this achievement to the state’s strong healthcare system and high-quality education.

“Massachusetts has the lowest premature death rate in the country and the lowest percentage of adults in fair or poor health,” Happe said. “The Bay State also ranks first in the nation for the quality of its school systems. In addition, Massachusetts has the third-highest median household income, at over $94,000.”

WalletHub’s Top 10 Best States to Live In for 2024:

  1. Massachusetts
  2. Florida
  3. New Jersey
  4. Utah
  5. New Hampshire
  6. Idaho
  7. Pennsylvania
  8. Wisconsin
  9. New York
  10. Wyoming

Ten Worst States to Live In

With Oklahoma ranking as the 7th-worst state to live in, Randal Ice, professor emeritus at the University of Central Oklahoma, emphasized in the study that state policymakers need to ensure competitive tax rates, especially for high-income and highly mobile individuals, to attract new residents.

However, even highly paid CEOs can relocate a company to a low-tax area, taking many jobs with them when tax rates are unfavorable,” Ice noted. “But life is about more than just taxes. Quality of life factors also influence where people choose to settle. States should take these aspects into account when providing services to residents and adjust accordingly. It’s a highly competitive environment for attracting the best and brightest.

WalletHub’s Top 10 Worst States to Live In for 2024:

  1. Louisiana
  2. New Mexico
  3. Arkansas
  4. Alaska
  5. Nevada
  6. Mississippi
  7. Oklahoma
  8. South Carolina
  9. Oregon
  10. Arizona

Read more.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑