A blog for LGBTQIA+ migrating to more welcoming states or counties
Author: Bob McCranie
I am so proud to run Texas Pride Realty Group. We set out on a mission in 2009 to serve the diverse communities of Texas and to hire kick-ass agents who practice the highest ethics and professionalism. I believe that the agent's role is to help the consumer make well-educated decisions, even if those decisions lead away from a purchase or sale.
I believe that education is vital in this industry. I currently have over 1300 hours of real estate courses on my transcript with the State of Texas. Additionally, I am a Real Estate Business Coach at Tom Ferry International, the largest-real-estate specific coaching company in the world. I coach agents in the US and Canada, and have coached clients in Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, and Switzerland. I also have knowledge of the UK and Irish markets.
Opening Texas Pride Realty was always a goal of mine and I am working night and day to be sure it is successful. The best way to do that is to be sure clients are satisfied and agents are busy. What better legacy could someone leave in this industry than a group of well-trained, high-quality brokers who do your job better than you?
The Associated Press NASHVILLE, Tenn. — On Thursday, a federal appeals court dismissed a lawsuit challenging a pioneering Tennessee law that imposes strict restrictions on drag shows. This decision overturned a previous lower court ruling that had found the statute unconstitutional and had partially blocked its enforcement.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that Friends of George’s, a Memphis-based LGBTQ+ theater company that filed the lawsuit, did not have the legal standing to challenge the law.
Friends of George’s had argued that the law would adversely impact their productions, which include “drag-centric performances, comedy sketches, and plays” without age restrictions. However, the appeals court concluded that Friends of George’s was not at risk of breaching the 2023 law because their performances were not deemed “harmful to minors.”
The law, passed last year with backing from the Republican-controlled Tennessee Legislature and Governor Bill Lee, does not explicitly mention “drag.” Instead, it redefines adult cabaret to include “adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors,” categorizing “male or female impersonators” alongside strippers and topless dancers.
The justices noted that the Tennessee Supreme Court had narrowly defined what constitutes “harmful to a minor” as material lacking “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for a reasonable 17-year-old.”
“FOG has not alleged that its performances lack serious value for a 17-year-old. In fact, it asserts the opposite. A member of FOG’s board admitted that its shows ‘are definitely appropriate’ for a 15-year-old and would ‘absolutely’ have artistic value for a 17-year-old,” the ruling stated.
Friends of George’s has not yet responded to requests for comment on the decision.
“LGBTQ+ students across California can breathe a sigh of relief,” stated one LGBTQ+ organization, following the passage of this groundbreaking law.
California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) has signed a pioneering law banning forced outings in state public schools.
The SAFETY Act prohibits school district policies that mandate educators to inform parents if their child requests to use pronouns or facilities different from the gender assigned at birth.
The law, which takes effect immediately, also protects teachers and administrators from retaliation if they choose not to follow district directives to out queer students to their parents. Additionally, it provides funding for resources to assist parents and families of queer students in having supportive conversations about their identities, ensuring that these discussions occur in a way that makes the children feel safe and respected.
The SAFETY Act — Support Academic Futures & Educators for Today’s Youth — passed the state Assembly in June by a vote of 60-15.
Forced outing policies have proliferated in California since 2023, with more than a dozen school districts implementing rules to notify parents and guardians of students who identify as trans or a gender different from the one listed on their birth certificate.
“The very personal decision for a student to come out should be on their own terms to whoever they choose to share that information with when they are ready,” said the bill’s author, San Diego Assemblyman Chris Ward (D), in a statement. “Teachers should not be the gender police.”
“In California, LGBTQ+ students — like all students — have the right to a safe and welcoming school environment,” Becca Cramer-Mowder with ACLU California Action said in a statement.
“With the Governor’s signature, our state becomes the first in the country to ensure protections against forced outing in school are clearly enshrined in statute,” she added. “LGBTQ+ students and their families deserve to decide on their own terms when and how to have conversations about coming out.”
Eight red states have enacted legislation mandating schools out trans students, while another five have passed laws promoting parental notification, according to the Movement Advancement Project.
In California, the policies have become a lightning rod, particularly in conservative inland areas of the state.
In April, a defiant conservative majority on the board of the Murrieta Valley Unified School District in Riverside County voted to ignore an order from the state to rescind a parental notification policy. A packed audience in the ruby red district cheered the result when it occurred.
Similar battles are being waged in other Riverside County school districts, including Temecula and Chino, both hotbeds of “parental rights” activism.
“We will continue to stand strong, linked arms all over California, to ensure the government does not infringe on parental rights — period,” Chino Valley School Board President Sonja Shaw said earlier this year.
A state investigation in Murrieta was prompted after two teachers filed a complaint. One was filed by 6th and 7th grade teacher Karen Poznanski, who is also a district parent with a nonbinary child.
“This policy, whether enforced or not, hindered our LGBTQ+ students from living authentically,” Poznanski told The Los Angeles Times. “Moreover, it not only compromised their privacy and dignity, but also perpetuated harm and discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals and their families.”
In a statement, the state LGBTQ+ advocacy organization Equality California said, “We are grateful to Governor Newsom for demonstrating his unwavering commitment to the LGBTQ+ community by signing the SAFETY Act into law. Over the past year, more than a dozen extremist school boards across California have considered or passed these harmful policies that openly discriminate against transgender students and prevent them from safely being themselves at school.”
“The SAFETY Act could not be more timely or necessary, and LGBTQ+ students across California can breathe a sigh of relief following today’s action by the Governor,” the statement continued. “LGBTQ+ youth across California can now have these important family conversations when they are ready and in ways that strengthen the relationship between parent and child, not as a result of extremist politicians intruding into the parent-child relationship.”
The governor singled out the two Fringe festivals when vetoing $32 million in statewide arts and culture funds.
On Thursday, the Tampa and Orlando Fringe festivals issued an open letter to Governor Ron DeSantis, formally offering to forfeit their approved grants for the 2025 fiscal year. The nonprofit International Fringe Festival of Central Florida was slated to receive $102,629, while Tampa’s festival anticipated significantly less at $7,909.
In return, the festivals requested that the governor support a legislative reversal of his $32 million veto on arts and culture funding.
This proposal follows DeSantis’ recent justification for vetoing arts funding statewide last month, where he specifically cited “sexual” content at festivals in Orlando and Tampa. DeSantis pointed to playwright Christen Hailey’s production at Tampa’s Fringe Festival, titled “Captain Havoc and the Big-Titty Bog Witches.”
During a news conference on June 27, DeSantis remarked, “You have your tax dollars being given in grants to things like the Fringe Festival, which is like a sexual festival where they’re doing all this stuff.”
The nonprofit clarified that Florida taxpayer dollars do not directly support artists. “Artists earn their income directly through ticket sales. In fact, 100% of an artist’s advertised ticket price is paid to that artist,” Fringe producers stated in an open letter to the governor. “Instead, taxpayer dollars help cover office expenses, ADA accommodations, and staff salaries.”
The approved funding for Fringe Festivals represented only .002 percent of the vetoed $32 million, a comparison Fringe leadership likened to “canceling Florida’s entire sports industry based on an objection with one player on one team.”
As of Friday, DeSantis’ office had not responded to two emails requesting comment.
Looking ahead, Fringe intends to reapply for state grants in future years. “The idea would be to forgo it this year, but then through collaboration and dialogue, foster a deeper understanding of the arts,” said Tampa Fringe producer Trish Parry.
According to Parry, alongside the show “Captain Havoc and the Big-Titty Bog Witches” on the festival webpage was a comedy performance titled “Florida Fever Dream.” This show featured a political cartoon depicting DeSantis riding an alligator wearing Minnie Mouse ears, with a pile of burning books in a campfire behind him.
“So that might have helped to stir things up, particularly against Tampa,” said Parry. “I’m sure you could find a show at Orlando Fringe with a title like ‘titty’ or something similar. I’m just certain that the ‘Florida Fever Dream’ show probably didn’t help matters.”
Both producers from Orlando and Tampa are hopeful to reconcile with DeSantis. They have extended invitations to him, his family, and his aides to attend their festivals in 2025 in hopes of fostering understanding.
Fringe producers wrote, “We ask that you reciprocate by welcoming and hosting us in October or November 2024 so that we can build bridges of understanding and deepen your familiarity with the benefits of arts & culture investments, thus empowering you to be an impassioned advocate.”
DeSantis has yet to RSVP.
Contributions to this report were made by Lawrence Mower.
The following weekly digest is authored and curated by the Trans Formations Project, a grassroots nonprofit committed to monitoring and raising awareness about the ongoing crisis of anti-trans legislative efforts across the United States.
Editorial Focus: Project 2025
What does Project 2025, an ultraconservative initiative under a Trump presidency, reveal about its stance on trans individuals? The project’s blueprint, known as Mandate for Leadership, provides the rationale behind many of the anti-trans legislative measures tracked by TFP. This extensive manifesto advocates for goals such as eliminating comprehensive sex education (62, 477), limiting rights for trans employees (584-585), curtailing or banning gender-affirming care for minors (345), and imposing further restrictions on speech and expression (5).
This week, we have categorized and analyzed the primary anti-trans objectives within Project 2025, segmented by section.
Executive Actions and Anti-Trans Legislation in Project 2025
Idea: “[T]he primary purpose of consolidating political power is to undermine the family. Its aim is to substitute people’s natural affections and loyalties with unnatural ones” (4).
Goal: Remove “the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (‘SOGI’), diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights…” from all federal rules, agency regulations, contracts, grants, legislation, and regulations (5).
Goal: Replace Biden’s Gender Policy Council with a Domestic Policy Council to “eliminate… the new ‘woke’ gender ideology, which promotes ‘gender affirming care’ and ‘sex-change’ surgeries for minors” (62).
Civil Rights (especially pages 582-585)
dea: “During the Obama and Biden Administrations, every facet of labor policy was utilized to promote race, sex, and other classifications, often discriminating against conservative and religious viewpoints, including pro-life perspectives.”
Goals:
“Limit the application of Bostock’s sex discrimination protections to sexual orientation and transgender status specifically in hiring and termination contexts.”
“Revoke regulations that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status, and sex characteristics.”
“Instruct agencies to concentrate their enforcement of sex discrimination laws on the biological binary definition of ‘sex.'”
Education (especially pages 333-346)
Idea: “There is no scientific or legal justification for redefining ‘sex’ as ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’ under Title IX.”
Goal: “Restore the Trump Administration’s Title IX regulation, emphasizing that ‘sex’ refers to a biologically defined fact recognized at birth; and enhance protections for faith-based educational institutions, programs, and activities.”
Idea: “Federal lawmakers should prevent public school employees from keeping information about a child secret from their parents.”
Goal: “Prohibit educators from using a name other than the one listed on a student’s birth certificate or using a pronoun different from the student’s biological sex without permission from the student’s parent(s) or guardian(s).”
Health & Human Services
Idea: “Permitting parents or physicians to ‘reassign’ the sex of a minor constitutes child abuse” (5).
Goals:
Enact a federal Parents Bill of Rights (345).
Cease Medicare coverage for gender-affirming surgeries.
Eliminate discrimination protections for LGBTQIA+ individuals in the Affordable Care Act (475).
Military (104)
Idea: “Gender dysphoria is inconsistent with the requirements of military service.”
Goal: “Revoke policies permitting transgender individuals to serve in the military.” Note: This objective gained momentum recently in the Senate Armed Services Committee report on the 2025 Military Funding Bill, which includes provisions preventing the Department of Defense (DoD) and its insurance plan from funding gender-affirming surgeries for service members and gender-affirming care for their minor dependents.
The Things We Won
Yale Law School and Yale School of Medicine recently collaborated on a report criticizing the Cass Review, authored by Dr. Hillary Cass in the U.K., which evaluated National Health Service (NHS) guidelines on gender-affirming care. The NHS cited the Cass Report in its recent decision to restrict puberty blockers for transgender minors. Additionally, conservative Indiana lawmakers referenced the Cass Report in IN SB0480, a law banning gender-affirming care for minors enacted last year.
The Cass Report concluded that “there is not a reliable evidence base” to recommend clinical interventions for transgender minors. The Yale review highlighted several critical issues with this conclusion, asserting that the Cass Report “obscures key findings, misrepresents its own data, and misapplies the scientific method.”
Federal prosecutors are currently investigating Dr. Eithan Haim for leaking confidential transgender patient files to conservative journalist Christopher Rufo. Outrage over these documents significantly contributed to the passage of TX SB14, a ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Formerly employed by Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston, Dr. Haim claims whistleblower immunity, alleging exposure of “illegal gender surgeries” on minors.
The hospital contends that all care provided was lawful and accuses Dr. Haim of jeopardizing patient and physician safety by leaking the documents. Dr. Haim has garnered broad support from conservative media and politicians. Ryan Patrick, son of Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and former U.S. Attorney during the Trump Administration, will represent Dr. Haim in the ongoing legal proceedings.
In Austin, the Texas Supreme Court has upheld the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, dismissing arguments from parents that it infringes on their rights to seek medical care for their transgender children.
In a decisive 8-1 ruling issued Friday, the all-Republican court upheld a law effective since September 1, 2023, making Texas the largest of over 25 states to enact laws restricting or banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. Many of these states are facing legal challenges, with the U.S. Supreme Court recently agreeing to hear an appeal concerning similar bans in Tennessee.
The Texas law prohibits transgender minors from accessing hormone therapies, puberty blockers, and transition surgeries, despite medical experts’ consensus that such surgeries are rarely performed on children. Children already undergoing banned treatments must cease them in a medically appropriate manner.
“The Legislature made a permissible, rational policy choice to limit available medical procedures for children, given the nascent understanding of gender dysphoria and its treatments,” the ruling stated, defending the legislative authority to regulate medical practice.
Lambda Legal, a civil rights organization for LGBTQ+ individuals, criticized the decision, asserting that it undermines parental and medical decision-making in favor of political interference.
The lawsuit against the Texas law argued it severely harms transgender teens by denying them crucial medical care recommended by physicians and parents. While a lower court had deemed the law unconstitutional, it remained in effect pending the state Supreme Court’s decision.
This legislative trend reflects broader challenges to transgender rights, extending from healthcare to participation in sports and access to public facilities. As restrictions increase, families often face the burden of seeking necessary care out of state due to local shortages.
The Texas law, signed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott, has sparked significant controversy and activism, including protests during legislative sessions by transgender rights advocates.
Medical organizations such as the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics support gender-affirming care for youths, emphasizing its role in alleviating gender dysphoria and promoting mental well-being. Despite opposition citing concerns about irreversible decisions, medical experts emphasize the benefits supported by research and clinical experience.
This ruling could significantly influence Wisconsin’s elections leading up to the 2024 presidential contest, especially as a battleground state.
On Friday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4-3 to reverse a previous decision and allow the widespread use of ballot drop boxes across the crucial battleground state. This decision overturns a ruling from less than two years ago that restricted most drop boxes, emphasizing that municipal clerks now have the discretion to utilize secure drop boxes within the bounds of the law.
The decision, anticipated after liberal justices signaled their stance during May’s oral arguments, is poised to significantly impact Wisconsin’s 2024 presidential election dynamics. During the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic, Democrats widely encouraged drop box use among voters, a trend likely to continue this fall. Conversely, despite past Republican claims linking drop boxes to voter fraud, some Wisconsin Republicans are now advocating their use in light of the court’s ruling.
This ruling marks the latest development in Wisconsin’s electoral landscape, following a series of legal challenges and policy changes. Previously, the state Supreme Court, under conservative influence, restricted drop box locations to election clerk offices in a 2022 decision. However, with a shift in court composition favoring liberals in 2023, challenges led by Democratic groups sought to overturn these restrictions, arguing that Wisconsin law neither expressly prohibits nor mandates drop box use for returning absentee ballots.
With the court’s focus solely on the correctness of the 2022 ruling, this decision is expected to prompt further debate and adaptation among both political parties leading up to the upcoming elections in this pivotal swing state.
In the years following the 2020 election, former President Donald Trump and his allies frequently criticized the use of drop boxes for absentee ballots, falsely alleging widespread voter fraud. However, there has been a recent shift within the GOP nationally towards more favorable attitudes regarding early and alternative voting methods, including drop boxes. Even Trump himself has started to soften his stance on this issue.
NBC News reported in May that the Wisconsin GOP planned to encourage their supporters to use drop boxes in the upcoming presidential election if the state Supreme Court reinstated them, despite their previous criticisms. They also outlined plans to deploy volunteers to monitor drop boxes in Democratic-leaning areas.
The ruling on Friday, which reinstated the use of drop boxes, was largely expected. The four liberal justices on the Wisconsin Supreme Court had indicated during May’s oral arguments that they believed the court’s previous ruling 22 months ago was incorrect. They emphasized that Wisconsin law does not explicitly address drop boxes and dismissed conservative claims of fraud associated with their use in past elections, citing a lack of evidence of such wrongdoing in the 2020 election.
Conservatives in the state had argued against revisiting the issue so soon after the previous decision, citing the doctrine of “stare decisis” which upholds legal precedents. However, liberal justices on the court rejected this argument, drawing parallels to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision overturning Roe v. Wade, where they criticized the earlier decision and its consequences.
Justice Jill Karofsky, who dissented in the original 2022 ruling, highlighted the flawed reasoning behind the decision and its potential negative impact. Janet Protasiewicz, whose election victory in 2023 shifted the court’s balance in favor of liberals, joined the majority in Friday’s decision to reinstate drop boxes.
Republicans contend that the rule is a tactic by the Biden administration to permit transgender females to participate in girls’ and women’s sports teams.
Kansas high school students, family members and advocates rally for transgender rights in Topeka on Jan. 31.
By The Associated Press
TOPEKA, Kan. — A federal judge in Kansas has blocked the enforcement of a federal rule that expands anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ students in four states and various other locations.
U.S. District Judge John Broomes ruled on Tuesday, suggesting the Biden administration reconsider whether enforcing the rule is “worth the effort.”
This ruling is the third of its kind in less than three weeks but is more extensive, affecting Alaska, Kansas, Utah, and Wyoming, which challenged the rule. It also impacts a Stillwater, Oklahoma, middle school involved in a lawsuit and members of three groups supporting Republican efforts to roll back LGBTQ rights nationwide: Moms for Liberty, Young America’s Foundation, and Female Athletes United.
Judge Broomes, appointed by former President Donald Trump, ordered these groups to list the schools their members’ children attend so those schools also don’t have to comply with the rule. Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, who argued the case for the states, said this could affect thousands of schools.
The Biden administration rule, set to take effect in August under the Title IX civil rights law of 1972, aims to prohibit sex discrimination in education. Judge Broomes’ order will remain in effect through the trial of the lawsuit in Kansas, with the judge indicating that the states and three groups are likely to prevail.
Republicans have argued that the rule is a tactic by the Biden administration to permit transgender females to participate in girls’ and women’s sports, a practice that is banned or restricted in Kansas and at least 24 other states. The administration has clarified that the rule does not apply to athletics. Opponents of the rule have also framed the issue as protecting the privacy and safety of women and girls in bathrooms and locker rooms.
Besides Broomes, two other federal judges issued rulings in mid-June blocking the new rule in 10 additional states. The rule aimed to protect LGBTQ students by expanding the definition of sexual harassment at schools and colleges and adding safeguards for victims.
Like the other judges, Broomes deemed the rule arbitrary and concluded that the Department of Education and its secretary, Miguel Cardona, exceeded the authority granted by Title IX. He also determined that the rule violated the free speech and religious freedom rights of parents and students who reject transgender students’ gender identities and wish to express those views at school or in public.
Broomes stated in his 47-page order that it is up to the Biden administration “to determine in the first instance whether continued enforcement in compliance with this decision is worth the effort.”
Broomes also expressed concerns that non-transgender students’ privacy and safety could be compromised by the rule. He referenced an Oklahoma middle school student’s statement that “on some occasions” cisgender boys used a girls’ bathroom “because they knew they could get away with it.”
“It is not hard to imagine that, under the Final Rule, an industrious older teenage boy may simply claim to identify as female to gain access to the girls’ showers, dressing rooms, or locker rooms, so that he can observe female peers disrobe and shower,” Broomes wrote, reflecting a common but largely debunked narrative from anti-trans activists about gender identity and school accommodations for transgender students.
The courtroom erupted in cheers as Woodward’s conviction was announced.
Samuel Woodward (left) was arrested on suspicion of homicide in the death of Blaze Bernstein (right). Photo: Orange County Sheriff’s Department
During the three-week trial, Samuel Woodward, convicted of murdering gay, Jewish student Blaze Bernstein, was found guilty of first-degree murder with a hate crime enhancement. Despite attempts by Woodward’s attorney to portray the killing as a spontaneous, irrational act, the jury remained unconvinced. The hate crime verdict prompted audible cheers throughout the courtroom, which the judge had to quiet down.
Woodward is scheduled to be sentenced to life in prison without parole on October 24th.
Bernstein’s family rejoiced at the verdict.
“This ruling brings us great relief, knowing that justice has been served and this dangerous individual who took our son’s life will no longer pose a threat to anyone else. We can now move forward knowing that he can’t hurt anyone else,” said Blaze’s mother, Jeanne Pepper Bernstein, in an interview with NBC News Los Angeles.
In a statement, Blaze’s family expressed their sentiments: “No verdict can bring Blaze back. He was an exceptional human being—a humanitarian with so much potential ahead. We will forever miss his wit, kindness, intelligence, and the myriad talents he possessed as a scientist, artist, writer, chef, and son. There will never be another like him, and his potential will forever remain unrealized and unshared.”
Woodward’s attorney, Ken Morrison, acknowledged his client’s guilt in an interview with ABC News: “I admitted from the outset that my client was guilty of a serious, violent homicide. However, it’s important to recognize that there are different degrees and types of homicide.”
Blaze was murdered by Woodward during Blaze’s visit to California. The two had been classmates and had agreed to meet up. During their conversation at a park, Woodward attacked Blaze, fatally stabbing him 28 times in the darkness.
“After killing Bernstein, burying his body, and cleaning up the scene, Woodward texted a friend, ‘Hey man, life is good,’” revealed the Orange County District Attorney’s office.
During the trial, Woodward described feeling overwhelming anger, which led to the relentless stabbing. When asked by his defense attorney how many times he had stabbed Bernstein, Woodward replied, “No.”
Discrepancies emerged in Woodward’s testimony during the trial compared to statements he made in 2018 shortly after the crime. Initially, he claimed Blaze had briefly left and returned, attempting to kiss Woodward, which supposedly triggered the attack. In his trial testimony, however, Woodward alleged Bernstein had groped him while intoxicated and threatened to distribute compromising photos online.
No evidence supported Woodward’s claims. Conversely, evidence from both men’s phones contradicted his account.
Woodward failed to mention during his testimony that he had previously relocated to Texas to train with the neo-Nazi hate group, Atomwaffen Division. This group advocates for violent, militia-style actions targeting minorities, including LGBTQ+ individuals.
At the time of the murder, Woodward possessed over 100 pieces of extremist content on his phone, laptop, and social media accounts, including racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic material.
In the months leading up to the murder, Woodward had sent violent messages on Grindr, posing as “gay curious” before using derogatory language and advocating violence and death against gay men. Two weeks before the murder, he posted a photo of a bloody knife on Snapchat with the caption, “Texting is boring, but murder isn’t.”
“Hate has no place in Orange County,” emphasized District Attorney Todd Spitzer. “Woodward stands as a stark reminder of our commitment to safeguarding vulnerable members of society from violence fueled by hatred and fear, not as a figure to be admired by other hate groups.”
Senior Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Walker, speaking to ABC News, expressed relief for the Bernsteins: “I’m incredibly happy for the Bernsteins because this has been an agonizing process. Woodward had his bags packed, was already in contact with Atomwaffen members about leaving the area, and thought he could get away with it. It’s only by the grace of God that the rain came and led to the discovery of Bernstein’s body.”
The church reportedly delayed a police investigation and then harassed a member after her child was sexually assaulted.
Gateway Church, an evangelical megachurch located in Southlake, Texas, has reached a legal settlement concerning allegations that five church pastors and a youth leader covered up a child sexual assault perpetrated by another church member. The pastors reportedly failed to report the assault to law enforcement or the child’s mother, delayed investigating the incident, and subjected both the victim and her mother — devoted church members — to punitive measures.
This settlement follows the recent resignation of Robert Morris, the church’s founder and a former member of Donald Trump’s evangelical executive advisory board. Morris stepped down shortly after publicly acknowledging that he had molested a 12-year-old girl during his tenure as a 20-year-old pastor.
In August 2020, an unnamed mother filed a recently settled lawsuit on behalf of her daughter. According to The Christian Post, both frequently attended worship services, church-sponsored functions, and participated in various ministries. The alleged sexual assault by an unnamed church member took place around March 14, 2018, at the member’s residence.
The recently settled lawsuit, filed in August 2020 by an unnamed mother on behalf of her daughter, detailed concerning allegations involving Church youth leader Logan Edwards. Edwards reportedly learned of the assault from conversations with the alleged assaulter and two other young church members, as stated in the lawsuit. Despite this knowledge, five church pastors — Kelly Jones, Rebecca Wilson, Samantha Golden, Mondo Davis, and Sion Alford — allegedly took no legal action. They reportedly spoke multiple times with the accused member and their parents but did not file a formal complaint with child protective or law enforcement agencies, nor did they inform the victim’s mother about the alleged assault.
“When the mother discovered the assault, she reported it to the Haltom City Police Department,” the lawsuit stated. Subsequently, the pastors allegedly engaged in efforts to conceal, distort, and discredit the assault accusations during the police investigation. This purported concealment, according to the lawsuit, allowed significant evidence of the alleged criminal assault to degrade, hampering law enforcement’s ability to conduct an accurate investigation.
Additionally, church leaders purportedly encouraged Gateway members to ostracize the minor’s mother and removed her from ministries where she had served diligently. As a result, the mother and daughter reportedly experienced profound shame, embarrassment, and emotional distress.
Although the lawsuit sought damages ranging from $200,000 to $5,000,000, the church settled for an undisclosed amount on April 18. The church emphasized it admitted no liability and settled solely to “buy peace,” according to a public statement.
Previously, the church reportedly settled a 2016 lawsuit involving allegations that church leaders destroyed video footage showing a boy sexually assaulting another in the church’s child care program, as reported by WFAA.
Last month, Gateway Church’s founder, Robert Morris, publicly admitted to molesting a 12-year-old girl on Christmas night in 1982 when he was 20 years old and staying with her family. Morris, who was married with a young son at the time of the molestation, is now 62 years old. He resigned shortly after his admission garnered national attention.
The memo also stated that gender is a synonym for sex, which is “determined by innate and immutable biological characteristics.”
Florida officials have quietly revoked a policy that allowed transgender residents to change the gender marker on their driver’s licenses, coinciding with other efforts to halt the state’s legal recognition of trans people.
A leaked memo dated January 26 from Robert Kynoch, deputy executive director of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV), indicates that the department has immediately ended its policy of reissuing licenses to update gender markers, a practice in place since 2018. Instead, “gender” will once again be considered “a synonym for ‘sex,’” which Kynoch claimed is “determined by innate and immutable biological characteristics.”
Independent journalist and legal analyst Alejandra Caraballo, who posted a screenshot of the memo on X (formerly Twitter) Monday night, was the first to publicize the policy change. Although no DHSMV representative has publicly commented on the memo’s veracity, Florida Rep. Anna Eskamani appeared to confirm its authenticity on Tuesday. Eskamani stated that as of January 30, DHSMV computer systems already appear to disallow changes to a registered driver’s gender.
“This is another gross example of how every state agency has been weaponized to attack trans people,” Eskamani wrote.
Florida Democratic Party (FDP) leaders echoed this sentiment. “Florida Republicans’ obsession with trans people has to stop,” FDP chair Nikki Fried said in a statement on Tuesday. Fried specifically called out Gov. Ron DeSantis and described a pattern of similar, covert rule changes throughout his administration.
“We’ve seen state agencies continually weaponized under Ron DeSantis, and this rule change at DHSMV serves the same purpose as the rest — allowing right-wing extremists to get the wildly unpopular policies they want without having to go on the record as voting for them,” Fried stated.
LGBTQ+ Democratic Caucus president Nathan Bruemmer concurred, saying, “Our government agencies must remember that their responsibility is to serve Floridians — not the failed agenda of a power-hungry Governor who is out of touch with the people of Florida.”
Kynoch’s letter also warned of possible civil and criminal fraud charges for “misrepresenting one’s gender” on official identification. This is a concern for trans Floridians needing renewals, but those with valid IDs shouldn’t panic yet, Southern Legal Counsel attorney Simone Chriss told NBC affiliate WTVJ.
“There’s no reason for individuals who currently have a driver’s license or identification card that reflects their gender identity to be concerned,” Chriss explained. “The DHSMV or the police have no authority to suspend or revoke their licenses.”
The new DHSMV policy seems like an overture to new Republican-sponsored bills in the Florida legislature, which, if passed, would effectively end legal recognition of trans identities in the state. These proposals, similar to Kynoch’s letter, define “sex” strictly as a genetic binary and would require Floridians to sign an affidavit declaring their “biological sex” as a driver’s license requirement.
Ironically, because federal law still recognizes “gender” as a lived experience rather than a genetic binary, the DHSMV rule change may place Florida’s ID policies in conflict with the Real ID Act. Florida is also grappling with an actual ID fraud and identity theft crisis, but instead of addressing these issues, the focus seems to be on persecuting queer people.
fleeredstates.blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.