Republicans introduce measure banning DEI in federal government | TheHill

This blog originally appeared at THE HILL.

Republicans propose legislation to prohibit DEI initiatives in the federal government.

Congressional Republicans have proposed legislation to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and funding within the federal government.

The Dismantle DEI Act, introduced on Wednesday by Senator JD Vance (R-Ohio), aims to abolish all federal DEI initiatives and cease DEI-related funding for agencies, contractors, organizations, and educational accreditation bodies that receive federal support.

“DEI is a harmful ideology that fosters hatred and racial division,” Vance stated. “It should not be present in our federal government or anywhere in our society. I am proud to introduce this bill to remove DEI from our federal system by terminating such programs and cutting off funding for DEI policies. Americans’ tax dollars should not be used to promote this radical and divisive ideology—this legislation ensures they will not be.”

In 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to “cultivate a workforce that draws from the full diversity of the Nation,” aiming to remove structural barriers faced by underserved and minority communities.

Representative Michael Cloud (R-Texas), the bill’s primary sponsor in the House, stated that DEI initiatives, while presented as promoting fairness, “have instead fostered division and racial bias within our institutions and culture.”

Cloud emphasized the necessity of the bill, framing it as a crucial measure to reinstate merit and equality, rejecting the concept of equity, within America’s government institutions. He argued that the DEI bureaucracy not only fosters division but also wastes taxpayer money. “It’s absurd to fund these divisive policies, especially using American tax dollars, and it’s time for Congress to put an end to them once and for all,” Cloud stated firmly.

Fifteen House Republicans have thrown their support behind the bill, reflecting the ongoing Republican resistance to DEI initiatives, often characterized as part of a broader “woke” agenda. This sentiment was underscored last year when Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed legislation prohibiting public universities from funding DEI programs and requiring diversity commitments in hiring statements. The law also removed majors and minors related to critical race theory and what was deemed “radical” feminist or gender theories. In a similar vein, Texas Governor Greg Abbott instructed public universities in his state to cease considering DEI statements in their hiring procedures in February.

Across the nation, legislation aimed at reducing DEI spending and altering hiring guidelines at colleges and universities has been introduced in a dozen states. The Dismantle DEI Act represents the latest attempt to ban such programs at the federal level, following the disbandment of the House Office of Diversity and Inclusion in March as part of a government spending bill.

Senator Rick Scott, who co-introduced the act with Vance, criticized the Biden administration for promoting what he sees as far-left policies that prioritize ideology over merit. “Taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to foot the bill for federal government agencies to push their woke DEI agenda,” Scott asserted, highlighting the necessity of the Dismantle DEI Act.

In addition to revoking Biden’s 2021 executive order, the act would dismantle the Office of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility within the Office of Personnel Management as well as the Chief Diversity Officers Executive Council. Senator Eric Schmitt, a co-sponsor, labeled DEI rhetoric and programs as “poisonous ideology,” expressing his commitment to eradicating DEI programs from federal institutions.

CBS News: Texas man details wife’s miscarriage amid state’s abortion laws | Khou

This blog originally appeared at CBS NEWS.

A Texas father told CBS News that he and his wife are living a nightmare after she suffered a miscarriage following multiple unsuccessful attempts to receive medical treatment.

DALLAS — Some families are experiencing medical challenges due to Texas’ abortion law, as highlighted in a CBS News report that featured one family’s struggles.

A Texas father shared with CBS News that he and his wife are enduring a nightmare after she suffered a miscarriage following numerous attempts to obtain medical treatment.

Ryan Hamilton, a 43-year-old radio host, garnered significant attention on social media after sharing about his wife’s miscarriage.

CBS News did not reveal his wife’s name in their report, and she remains not ready to discuss the incident publicly.

“When you find out your baby doesn’t have a heartbeat, that’s only the beginning,” Hamilton told CBS News. “So, the conversation becomes, what do we do?”

On May 16, Hamilton’s wife, over three months pregnant with their second child, learned that the baby no longer had a heartbeat.

Medical records obtained by CBS News indicate that Hamilton’s wife was treated at a North Texas emergency room, where doctors informed her that the baby had no heartbeat.

“We were told she could take medication to start the process to finish… to finish what had already started at home,” Hamilton explained to CBS News.

Doctors prescribed misoprostol, a labor-inducing drug used for miscarriages and abortions. She was instructed to take the medication at home and return if it did not work within two days.

Hamilton told CBS News that the medication didn’t work, and when they returned to the hospital, the doctor said they couldn’t prescribe the medicine.

Confused, Hamilton and his wife sought other options and went to another hospital, only to be denied treatment once again.

“You want to panic, but you can’t,” Hamilton told CBS News. “At this point, you’re just thinking, ‘Get my wife safe.'”

While waiting for answers at the second hospital, Hamilton sensed that the doctors were uncertain about what they were permitted to do.

“That’s what it feels like. They feel scared. The doctors feel scared,” he said in the interview.

Texas law prohibits abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, except in medical emergencies. Hamilton explained that the doctors told them it wasn’t a significant enough emergency to perform the procedure.

The procedure they were denied is called “dilation and curettage,” but the law does not require a medical emergency for it to be performed if there is no cardiac activity.

In a statement to CBS News, the hospital said they follow Texas and federal laws in accordance with national standards of care.

Hamilton and his wife still didn’t know what to do. Doctors gave her stronger medication and sent her home. In the following days, Hamilton found his wife unconscious on the bathroom floor, surrounded by blood. He rushed her to the hospital, where doctors confirmed the medication had worked.

Hamilton told CBS News they are not planning to sue any of the hospitals involved, but he hopes his story will help others in the future. He said his wife is focused on healing and therapy.

Supreme Court to rule on pivotal abortion cases two years after overturning Roe v. Wade

This blog originally appeared at NBC NEWS.

The justices will decide whether to impose new restrictions on the abortion pill mifepristone, and whether a federal law requiring emergency room treatment conflicts with a state abortion ban.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is poised to rule this month on two significant abortion cases that could have nationwide repercussions. This marks the first time the justices are revisiting the issue since overturning Roe v. Wade.

The 2022 decision to revoke the right to obtain an abortion caused widespread upheaval, prompting a wave of new state-level abortion restrictions and encouraging anti-abortion activists to seek further limitations.

The most closely watched case involves the court deliberating whether to implement new restrictions on the widely used abortion pill mifepristone, including tighter regulations on mail-order access.

In a less publicized yet potentially impactful case, the justices are examining whether Idaho’s near-total abortion ban conflicts with a federal law mandating emergency medical care for patients, including pregnant women.

Rabia Muqaddam, a lawyer at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which supports abortion rights, referenced the 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization “set off a chain reaction that we are seeing in all sorts of ways, including the two cases now before the court.

Theories that were previously considered “the fringe of the fringe” are now “sufficiently mainstream to make it to the Supreme Court,” she added.

The new cases show that the court’s stated aim of getting out of the business of deciding what conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh called “difficult moral and policy questions” was easier said than done. As such, the upcoming rulings will provide further evidence of how far the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, is willing to go in curbing abortion access.

In the mifepristone case, the court is weighing whether to impose new restrictions on the pills’ availability, including access by mail. Such a move would dramatically decrease the ability of women to obtain the pills, especially in states with new abortion restrictions.

The legal question in the Idaho case is whether a federal law that requires stabilizing treatment for patients in emergency rooms trumps the state restrictions in certain circumstances when doctors believe an abortion is required to protect the health of a pregnant woman.

Jim Campbell, chief legal counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative Christian legal group that is representing anti-abortion interests in both cases, said the legal issues in each of them reflect overreach by the Biden administration in response to Roe being overturned.

“They’re both instances where the federal government is doing things, whether directly or indirectly, to interfere with state pro-life laws,” he added.

Based on oral arguments earlier this year, it seems likely that anti-abortion groups will lose in the mifepristone case, leaving the status quo unchanged. That means the Idaho case could have a bigger practical impact if the court backs the state, which seems possible based on questions asked by the justices.

Rulings are expected by the end of the month when the court traditionally concludes its nine-month term that begins in October. The court will also be issuing a slew of other rulings on hot-button issues, including former President Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution in his election interference case.


Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rule-abortion-cases-two-years-overturning-roe-v-wade-rcna155511

Texas Education Agency will take control of Houston ISD | The Texas Tribune

This blog originally appeared at THE TEXAS TRIBUNE.

The announcement comes almost four years after the agency first moved to take over the district.

Millard House II, superintendent of the Houston Independent School District, delivers the HISD State of the Schools Address in Houston on March 3, 2023. The Texas Education Agency will replace House and the district’s school board as part of a state takeover. Credit: Joseph Bui for The Texas Tribune.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.


After a prolonged legal battle and weeks of speculation, the Texas Education Agency on Wednesday confirmed it’s removing Houston Independent School District’s democratically elected school board and superintendent, effectively putting the state in charge of its largest school district.

Houston ISD, with 276 schools and an enrollment of nearly 200,000 students, will now be the largest district the agency has taken over since 2000, when it first intervened in a struggling school district.

Superintendent Millard House II and the current school board will finish out the school year, but the TEA will replace them after June 1 with “a board of managers.”

The Texas Tribune thanks its sponsors. Become one.

The TEA commissioner decides how long the board is in place. Usually, this sort of takeover has lasted two to six years.

The agency will host community meetings in the coming weeks to explain how the takeover will take place.

The move is in response to years of poor academic outcomes at a single campus in the district, Phillis Wheatley High School, and allegations of misconduct from school board members. TEA Commissioner Mike Morath said state law requires his agency to either close that campus or appoint a new board to oversee the district.

Texas passed a law in 2015 mandating a state takeover if a school district or one of its campuses receives failing grades from the TEA for five consecutive years. Phillis Wheatley reached that threshold in 2019.

Catch up on education news with our weekly newsletter

Education Weekly Roundup newsletter

Catch up on education news with our weekly newsletter

Browse all newsletters at texastribune.org/newsletters.

Morath and the agency moved to force out the district’s school board that same year. The district pushed back and sued, but the Texas Supreme Court ruled in January that the agency could move forward with its plan to take over the district.

“Even with a delay of three full years caused by legal proceedings, systemic problems in Houston ISD continue to impact students most in need of our collective support,” Morath wrote in a letter to district leaders Wednesday.

Read more: https://www.texastribune.org/2023/03/15/texas-education-houston-isd-takeover/

Texas Supreme Court rejects challenge to abortion law over medical exceptions | AP News

This blog originally appeared at AP NEWS.

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — The Texas Supreme Court on Friday rejected a closely watched challenge to the state’s restrictive abortion ban, ruling against a group of women who had serious pregnancy complications and became the first in the U.S. to testify in court about being denied abortions since Roe v. Wade was overturned.

In a unanimous ruling, the all-Republican court upheld the Texas law that opponents say is too vague when it comes to when medically necessary exceptions are allowed. The same issue was at the center of a separate lawsuit brought last year by Kate Cox, a mother of two from Dallas, who sought court permission to obtain an abortion after her fetus developed a fatal condition during a pregnancy that resulted in multiple trips to an emergency room.

Abortion rights activists have struggled to stem the tide of restrictions that have taken effect in most Republican-led states since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe vs Wade, which for nearly 50 years had affirmed the constitutional right to an abortion.

The court said the law’s exceptions, as written, are broad enough and that doctors would be misinterpreting the law if they declined to perform an abortion when the mother’s life is in danger.

RELATED COVERAGE

This photo provided by KWTV shows a hail stone, Sunday, June 2, 2024, near Vigo Park, Texas. The National Weather Service in Lubbock, Texas, said they believe the stone, which measured more than 7 inches long, is a new state record. (Val Castor/KWTV via AP)

A hail stone the size of a pineapple was found in Texas. It likely sets a state record

Cecelia Ammon fills out her ballot on primary election day at the Central Mercado in Southeast Albuquerque, N.M., on Tuesday, June 4, 2024. (Chancey Bush/The Albuquerque Journal via AP)

New Mexico voters oust incumbents from Legislature with positive implications for paid family leave

FILE - Daniel Perry enters the courtroom at the Blackwell-Thurman Criminal Justice Center, May 10, 2023, in Austin, Texas. The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles on Thursday, May 16, 2024, recommended a full pardon for Perry, a former U.S. Army sergeant convicted of murder for fatally shooting an armed demonstrator in 2020 during nationwide protests against police violence and racial injustice. (Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman via AP, Pool, File)

Prosecutor asks Texas court to reverse governor’s pardon of man who fatally shot demonstrator

“Texas law permits a life-saving abortion,” the court wrote in the order signed by Justice Jane Bland.

The decision appeared to close, at least for now, another pathway for opponents who have sought to force the state to provide more clarity about when exceptions are allowed. Last year, plaintiffs in the lawsuit gave emotional accounts in an Austin courtroom over how they carried babies they knew would not survive and continued pregnancies that put their health in worsening danger.

“Now we know the courthouse doors are closed to them,” said Molly Duane, a staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, which represented the Texas women. “It seems Texans have nowhere to go but the voting booth, in terms of what comes next.”

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/texas-abortion-ban-lawsuit-supreme-court-ruling-53b871dcd40b2660604980e5daa19512

Kansas Constitution does not include a right to vote, state Supreme Court majority says | AP News

This blog originally appeared at AP NEWS.

The Kansas Supreme Court delivered a mixed ruling on Friday regarding multiple challenges to a 2021 election law. The court sided with state officials on one provision, revived challenges to others, and suggested that at least one challenge could be resolved before this year’s general election.

However, the most contentious part of the ruling was the majority opinion on the ballot signature verification measure, which stated that the Kansas Constitution’s Bill of Rights does not guarantee the right to vote. This opinion sparked strong dissent from three of the court’s seven justices.

The ballot signature verification measure mandates that election officials compare the signatures on advance mail ballots with those in voter registration records. While the state Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s dismissal of the lawsuit challenging this measure, the majority rejected arguments from voting rights groups that it violates state constitutional voting rights.

In fact, Justice Caleb Stegall, writing for the majority, said that the dissenting justices wrongly accused the majority of ignoring past precedent, holding that the court has not identified a “fundamental right to vote” within the state constitution.

RELATED COVERAGE

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach participates in a ceremony honoring fallen law enforcement officers at the Statehouse, May 3, 2024, in Topeka, Kan. Kobach's office is accusing two Florida residents of forging signatures on petitions to allow the No Labels part to put its candidates on the ballot, and the two also are accused of doing the same in Florida during an effort to get an abortion rights measure on the ballot there. (AP Photo/John Hanna)

Florida and Kansas are accusing 2 people of forging signatures for petition drives

FILE - A general overall interior view of GEHA Field at Arrowhead Stadium during the first half of an NFL football game between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Detroit Lions, Sept. 7, 2023 in Kansas City, Mo. Top Kansas legislators have intensified efforts to woo the Super Bowl champion Chiefs by offering to let the professional football franchise shape a plan for using state bonds to finance a new stadium in Kansas. (AP Photo/Reed Hoffmann, File)

Kansas leaders and new group ramp up efforts to lure the Kansas City Chiefs from Missouri

FILE - Douglas County, Kan., Clerk Jamie Shew discusses the operations of voting drop boxes while giving a tour of his office's warehouse in Lawrence, Kan., March 21, 2022. In the wake of a Kansas Supreme Court ruling that finds voting is not a fundamental right under the state's Bill of Rights, Shew says constant changes in election law are confusing not only to election officials, but to voters. (AP Photo/John Hanna, File)

The Kansas Supreme Court has ruled that voting is not a fundamental right. What’s next for voters?

“It simply is not there,” Stegall wrote.

Justice Eric Rosen, one of the three who dissented, shot back: “It staggers my imagination to conclude Kansas citizens have no fundamental right to vote under their state constitution.”

“I cannot and will not condone this betrayal of our constitutional duty to safeguard the foundational rights of Kansans,” Rosen added.

Conversely, the high court unanimously sided with the challengers of a different provision that makes it a crime for someone to give the appearance of being an election official. Voting rights groups, including Kansas League of Women Voters and the nonprofit Loud Light, argued the measure suppresses free speech and their ability to register voters as some might wrongly assume volunteers are election workers, putting them at risk of criminal prosecution.

Read More: https://apnews.com/article/voting-rights-kansas-supreme-court-0a0b5eea5c57cf54a9597d8a6f8a300e

Bar Runs ‘Heterosexual Awesomeness Month’ Promo | DallasExpress

This blog originally appeared at DALLAS EXPRESS.

Local Bar Introduces Special Promotion in Celebration of ‘Heterosexual Awesomeness Month’

The Old State Saloon, nestled in Eagle, Idaho, has ignited a buzz by proclaiming June as “Heterosexual Awesomeness Month.” The establishment took to social media to announce its plans, promising special offers including discounts, complimentary brews, and even hosting a “straight male clothing” competition.

“Join us throughout the month to honor heterosexuals, whose existence is fundamental to us all!” proclaimed the bar in a Facebook post. “Every Monday, dubbed Hetero Male Monday, any heterosexual gentleman dressed in attire befitting his heterosexuality will be treated to a complimentary draft beer. Wednesdays are reserved for Heterosexual Couples Day, with all couples enjoying a 15% discount on their tab.”

Further, Thursdays were designated for all-day happy hour pricing exclusively for heterosexual women.

However, the event triggered a wave of criticism online, with many expressing disapproval of the bar’s stance. Among the dissenting voices was an op-ed published by the Idaho Statesman, condemning the event as a veiled promotion of intolerance.

Responding defiantly, the Old State Saloon stood firm in its position. “1) We cherish our LGBTQ+ patrons! 2) We stand resolute and will not yield to those responding with hostility. 3) ALL are welcome to commemorate heterosexuality with us in June!” declared the establishment.

Despite the backlash, the bar refused to retract its declaration, citing its right to celebrate heterosexuality. The controversy coincided with Pride Month, established in 1970 to celebrate and honor the LGBTQ+ community.

While criticism abounded, there was also notable support for the promotion. The original post garnered over 2,500 comments, with subsequent discussions generating up to 1,000 additional comments.

“Since announcing Hetero Awesomeness Month, we’ve faced significant backlash: theft, vendors refusing service, wedding catering cancellations, and even baseless accusations against the owner,” lamented the bar. “Yet, amidst the chaos, we’ve also received overwhelming support from individuals who appreciate our celebration of ‘Heterosexual Awesomeness Month’ as an expression of freedom and personal values.”

Florida cities fly Pride flags after the GOP’s failed attempt to ban them | LGBTQNation

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

“I hope it stands as a beacon for the rest of the state and the entire country.”

After Florida Republicans tried unsuccessfully to pass a law banning government buildings from flying Pride flags earlier this year, several cities around the state hoisted the rainbow stripes over the weekend to mark the start of Pride Month.

Late last year, state Rep. David Borrero (R) introduced legislation aimed at banning flags “that represent a political viewpoint, including, but not limited to, a politically partisan, racial, sexual orientation and gender, or political ideology viewpoint.” House Bill 901 would have prohibited such flags from being displayed not only at schools but also above government buildings and universities.

But the bill died during the most recent legislative session, leaving local governments free to fly Pride flags this month.

On Friday, the city of St. Petersburg got an early start to Pride Month by raising the Progress Pride flag at City Hall. U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL), state Reps. Lindsay Cross (D) and Michele Rayner (D), Mayor Ken Welch (D), and the St. Petersburg City Council attended the flag-raising ceremony.

“Together, by raising the Pride flag at City Hall, our city boldly and unapologetically acts on its commitment to inclusivity, the celebration of diversity, and the simple but profound idea that people should have the freedom to love who they love,” Cross said. “This is in stark contrast to attempts at the state level to stifle our celebrations and to dim the light of beautiful members of our community.”

Cross noted the proposed flag ban and her vote against it. “Gratefully, due to the loud and proud voices that opposed the bill, it did not pass,” she said. “So, this year, as we stand under this Pride flag, we celebrate this small but important victory. Because we should not live in fear of repercussions from safe self-expression.”

“This marks the beginning of a celebration for equal rights for all across St. Petersburg, and I hope it stands as a beacon for the rest of the state and the entire country,” Castor told the crowd.

On Saturday morning, nearly 100 people gathered to see the Progress Pride flag hoisted above the Gulfport Public Library in the city of Gulfport, Pinellas County. The ceremony was attended by Vice Mayor and City Council member Ian O’Hara, members of the city council, Pinellas County Commissioner Charlie Justice, Pinellas County School Board member Caprice Edmond, Gecko Queen Robert Daunch, and candidates for Florida’s 13th Congressional District Whitney Fox and John Liccione.

The same day, the City of Miami raised the Progress Pride flag over its City Hall. “It’s important to understand that it’s a celebration because of how far the LGBTQ community has come,” Commissioner Damian Pardo said in a video posted to the City of Miami’s official X account. “It’s incredibly important to thank the city of Miami for creating a safe space for us in the LGBTQ community.”

The flag-raisings continued on Monday in Tampa and Orlando.

“During Pride Month and year-round, Orlando will continue to show that inclusion, kindness, and compassion are more powerful than divisiveness, hatred, and fear,” Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer wrote in an X post, along with a photo of the intersex-inclusive Progress Pride flag flying over City Hall. “As Mayor, I am proud that our city is a place that values, supports, and welcomes LGBTQ+ residents and visitors.”

“The colors of love and progress are flying high in Orlando as we raise the Progress Pride Flag at Orlando City Hall in celebration of our LGBTQ+ community and their ongoing fight for equality,” read a post on the city’s official X account.

In Tampa on Monday morning, Mayor Jane Castor (D) gave a brief history of the original rainbow Pride flag’s origins before raising the rainbow-striped flag above the city’s Old City Hall.

“It really is a wonderful definition and proclamation of our community and the pride that we have,” Castor said of the flag. Members of Tampa’s LGBTQ+ community “are our police officers, our firefighters, our paramedics, the individuals that protect our country down at MacDill Air Force Base, they are our teachers, our nurses. They are our neighbors, our friends, and our family. It is our community, and we’re very, very proud of that.”

Castor also called on those gathered to “continue to stay focused on ensuring that everyone is treated with dignity and respect” in the face of the recent rise in anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric in Florida and across the nation.

On Tuesday morning, Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava (D), County Commissioner Eileen Higgins, and other local leaders will raise the Pride flag about the city’s Stephen P. Clark Government Center. According to a press release, this will mark the fourth consecutive year that the Miami-Dade County government has raised the Pride flag “to reaffirm our commitment to making Miami-Dade an inclusive, welcoming County that celebrates our rich diversity.”

A GOP “library porn” law mandates that a small rural library serve adults only. | LGBTQNation

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

The library lacks the space to abide with the legislation and is concerned about lawsuits.

While most people have happy memories of browsing the shelves, going to story hours, or participating in programming at their neighborhood libraries, Donnelly, Idaho, is making the shift to become an adults-only library.

H.B. is the cause of the alteration. 710, often known as the “library porn bill,” states that anyone may use the library if a child is exposed to mature or inappropriate content, provided that the content is kept out of the children’s reach and placed in a designated “adults-only” area.

H.B. “Obscene content” will be “Judged by the average person, applying contemporary community standards,” according to 710.

It appears that the measure also targets LGBT individuals. Many of the books that bill proponents identify as instances of unsuitable material have LGBTQ+ themes or are utilized for sex education, according to Boise State Public Radio.

The law’s supporters dismissed the concerns raised by its opponents, who said that it may be burdensome for smaller libraries. The bill was enacted last month. However, Donnelly Library claims that the space is simply too small for a “adult only” area that is sufficiently isolated from the children’s area.

“Donnelly Library has just 1024 square feet. feet. Because of our size, we are unable to keep our “grown up” literature out of children’s reach. Donnelly Library announced on Facebook that, as of July 1st, “we will be transitioning our Library to be an adult only library as per the legislation.”

The collection of the library is accessible to children enrolled in the paid program whose parents have signed a release. If not, children aren’t even allowed to use the restroom at the library.

“This is a hard change that was not at all what we had anticipated. We want to follow local, state, and federal laws, but due to our size, we also have to safeguard our employees, our library, and public funds,” they added in their letter.

Sherry Scheline of the Donnelly Library stated that they took the call out of concern for a lawsuit that would force the library to close to the public. “We can’t take those chances because we don’t have an attorney on retainer,” the woman stated. We must let someone other than a tiny, rural library to fight it out.

Governor Brad Little (R) vetoed a bill that was similar in 2023. According to him, Idaho libraries and their patrons will “have unintended consequences” as a result of the regulation.

Little stated, “We have many wonderful childhood memories of exploring our local library and losing ourselves in the sea of books and knowledge.”

Gov. Little reportedly stated that he signed the law since the current version reduced the required penalties, according to Boise State Public Radio.

Additionally, Donnelly Library said on Facebook that they will keep up their kid-focused programming, which includes summer learning and after-school activities. “The kids in these specific programs will have the option to sign a programming waiver, which will give the librarians the freedom to choose books carefully for their programs. As usual, the Donnelly Public Library plans its lessons with specific learning objectives in mind and keeps a close eye on what the kids are reading and learning.

In order to refurbish and enlarge the building and establish enough space between the adult and children’s sections to comply with the H.B., Donnelly Library requested donations. 710.

According to the Donnelly Library, they “will continue to serve our community to the best of our ability” for the time being.

Entering the state capital, demonstrators ask that the governor shield transgender children. | LGBTQNation

Four anti-trans bills are the target of the protests, which call for the governor to veto them.

Chris Sununu's headshot

Protests over measures that target transgender people erupted in front of the New Hampshire State House on Wednesday.

With posters like “Let Trans Kids Live” and “#letkidsplay,” the activists formed a line outside the building in an attempt to persuade Governor Chris Sununu (R) to veto four measures that pose a threat to transgender adolescents.

Grace Murray, Political Director of the New Hampshire Youth Movement, stated, “Back in 2018, Gov. Sununu chose to do the right thing and protect trans people in NH from discrimination.” She was alluding to the year that Sununu signed HB 1319, an anti-discrimination bill, into law. “It’s time for him to do the right thing again and veto these bills now that several horrifying, discriminatory pieces of legislation have reached his desk,” Murray continued.

Murrau went on, “NH is the ‘live free or die’ state, and those values should apply to everyone.” “Transgender individuals ought to be free to live in this state without having their rights violated on a regular basis. Gov. Sununu must veto these legislation in order to protect the liberties that we value highly in New Hampshire.

Alissandra Murray, a Democratic state lawmaker, told NBC 5 that “we need him to know that he needs to stand up like he did in 2018.” He asserted that acting in that manner was morally correct both then and now.

The governor allegedly received a petition from the protestors, but he declined to meet with them. The demonstrators were forced to go inside the building in response to his denial in order to keep calling for him to veto the laws.

Speaking to NBC 5, Sununu stated, “I think the voices around fairness and safety are being heard not just here in New Hampshire, but all across the country.” And this is something we’re going to treat with extreme seriousness.

A measure called HB 1205 would prohibit trans girls from participating in girls’ sports from the fifth to the twelfth grades. The law would demand birth certificates as verification of the biological sex of student-athletes. Additionally, kids and families who think a transgender athlete plays for a girls’ team would be able to sue the state and school under the proposed law.

The mild “Don’t Say Gay” bill, HB 1312, requires teachers to provide parents with a two-week notice to opt out of any curriculum that includes references to “sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or gender expression.” The measure designates this content as “objectionable.”

Gender affirming surgery is prohibited for minors under HB 619. Notably, gender-affirming procedures are nearly never performed on minors, unless, following years of medical treatment, both parents and doctors determine that the procedure is medically essential.

In a single day, these three bills were passed.

The most recent bill to reach the governor’s desk is HB 396, which would practically forbid transgender persons from using public restrooms and threatens to revoke the legal status of transgender people. Many are worried that this measure undoes some of the non-discrimination provisions of HB 1319, a bill from 2018.

Regarding LGBTQ+ rights, Sununu has a conflicted past. She has blocked anti-trans measures in the past and opposed a plan that would have made legal transitioning easier.

“I fundamentally don’t believe that biological boys should be competing in girls’ sports,” he stated in March. I believe it to be risky.

His vote on these proposals is still up in the air.

According to Ezra Brown, Community Press Liaison for the New Hampshire Youth Movement, “the people want Sununu to keep his word.” “He made it very clear in 2018: It is morally right to defend the rights and safety of trans people.”

“We implore him to veto these harmful bills as written. We will never forget what he does for us right now, nor what he did for us in the past. The populace remembers things well.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑