A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from enacting a policy that bans the use of “X” marker used by many nonbinary people on passports as well as the changing of gender markers.
In an executive order signed in January, the president used a narrow definition of the sexes instead of a broader conception of gender. The order says a person is male or female and it rejects the idea that someone can transition from the sex assigned at birth to another gender. The framing is in line with many conservatives’ views but at odds with major medical groups and policies under former President Joe Biden.
U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, sided with the American Civil Liberties Union’s motion for a preliminary injunction, which stays the action while the lawsuit plays out.
“The Executive Order and the Passport Policy on their face classify passport applicants on the basis of sex and thus must be reviewed under intermediate judicial scrutiny,” Kobick wrote. “That standard requires the government to demonstrate that its actions are substantially related to an important governmental interest. The government has failed to meet this standard.”
The ACLU, which sued the Trump administration on behalf of five transgender Americans and two nonbinary plaintiffs, said the new policy would effectively mean transgender, nonbinary and intersex Americans could not get an accurate passport.
“We all have a right to accurate identity documents, and this policy invites harassment, discrimination, and violence against transgender Americans who can no longer obtain or renew a passport that matches who they are,” ACLU lawyer Sruti Swaminathan said.
In response to the lawsuit, the Trump administration argued the passport policy change “does not violate the equal protection guarantees of the Constitution.” They also contended that the president has broad discretion in setting passport policy and that plaintiffs would not be harmed by the policy, since they are still free to travel abroad.
On Tuesday, Indiana Gov. Mike Braun (R) signed legislation banning trans women from playing on college women’s sports teams.
The law “prohibits a male, based on the student’s biological sex at birth in accordance with the student’s genetics and reproductive biology, from participating on an athletic team or sport designated as being a female, women’s, or girls’ athletic team or sport.” It also requires state schools and some private schools to “establish grievance procedures for a violation of these provisions.”
The legislation extends the state’s anti-trans sports policies that already exist for K-12 athletes. In 2022, the Indiana legislature voted to override then-Gov. Eric Holcomb’s (R) veto of an anti-trans sports bill, which banned transgender girls and women from participating in school sports. Holcomb claimed it was unconstitutional and addressed a nonexistent issue in the state.
In March, Braun also signed two anti-trans executive orders, one banning trans women from women’s sports at the collegiate level and the other declaring there are only two genders: male and female.
“Women’s sports create opportunities for young women to earn scholarships and develop leadership skills,” he said in a statement at the time. “Hoosiers overwhelmingly don’t want those opportunities destroyed by allowing biological males to compete in women’s sports, and today’s executive order will make sure of that.”
In a statement defending his executive order legally erasing trans and nonbinary identities, he touted the “scientific fact of biological sex” and claimed “replacing” that with “the always-changing, self-reported idea of ‘gender identity’ has real consequences.”
“Indiana will not go along with this radical new idea of what gender means,” he said, “and we will not allow tax dollars to be used to promote this ideology — instead, we’re going to focus on providing Freedom and Opportunity for all Hoosiers.”
The press release announcing the orders stated, “Indiana will not go along with the extreme gender ideology that created the problem in women’s sports in the first place.”
In reality, there is no problem in women’s sports, as there is only a record of a handful of out transgender college and K-12 students even participating.
NCAA President Charlie Baker told a Senate committee in December that he is aware of fewer than 10 transgender athletes among more than 500,000 student-athletes who compete in NCAA championship sports.
And reporting by the Associated Press in 2021 revealed that dozens of lawmakers who sponsored legislation to restrict trans athletes’ participation in school sports couldn’t cite a single example in their own state where trans athletes had caused problems.
Even more, a recent study found that trans women actually underperform when compared to cis athletes. The study confirms that transitioning presents various physical changes, such as a lower center of mass and fat distribution, decreased muscle mass and bone density, and lower blood oxygen levels.
The mother of a transgender child who tried to speak out against proposed changes to her school district’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies was forcibly removed by four police officers when she said one word at a meeting of the City Schools of Decatur Board of Education on Tuesday evening.
That word was “cowards.”
“I’m practicing my rights as a parent. I’m in no way resisting,” she said as she was carried out. “I’m not resisting, and this is what fascists do!”
Kotler went to the emergency board meeting to speak against changes to the district’s DEI policy, which used to require that “all learning environments… be inclusive, safe, secure, and supportive while also ensuring that no student group is marginalized.” This policy, as well as four others, was changed to remove words like “equity” and “Americans with Disabilities Act.” Two of the policies were rescinded completely.
The district’s DEI policy now states that it is “designed to achieve fair and just access to opportunity and resources that provide all humans the ability to thrive.”
Kotler, who is the mother of three children, including one transgender daughter and one nonbinary child, went to the meeting and shouted “Cowards!” at the board. Advocate reports that Board Chair Carmen Sulton asked her to leave.
“I said one word, I have already stated I have no intention of speaking again until public comment,” she responded. “I’m going to sit here. I have offered that if it makes the board feel comfortable, you, as a security employee, are welcome to sit next to me. If I speak again outside of public comment, I will leave. I have the right to be here, I have not used harsh language or threats.”
Police then approached her, but she didn’t get up. So they lifted her out of her seat and dragged her away, dropping her off on the stairs in front of the building.
“I’m practicing my rights as a parent. I’m in no way resisting,” she said as she was dragged off. “I’m not resisting and this is what fascists do!”
“It’s beyond evil that anyone is threatening these programs,” she later told Atlanta News First. “Our children spend a huge chunk of their lives at school. Their own sense of self and self-worth is developed at school. If we stop policies and programs that make those spaces inclusive and safe for everyone, we know what happens.”
“There are marginalized children and economically disadvantaged children in our district who rely on these programs.”
Decatur’s is one of many school districts across the country rewording their DEI policies in light of the new presidential administration’s antipathy towards promoting equal rights for minority students, particularly those who are transgender and nonbinary.
At least dozens, but likely many more Americans from the LGBTQIA+ community have fled to the Netherlands in recent months out of fear of Donald Trump’s policies, AD reports after surveying organizations involved in helping them. The number of American asylum applications is already higher than in the whole of 2024, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND) told the newspaper.
Since Trump took office for his second term as United States president, the American government implemented policy to only recognize two genders, ban rainbow flags from government buildings, scrap the funding of transgender care for young people, and officially ban terms like “gender identity,” “non-binary,” and “transsexual.” Some conservative states are going even further. Arkansas, for example, is trying to ban hairstyles that “do not match” the gender children were assigned at birth.
Organizations like Transgender Network, LGBT Asylum Support, and Trans Rescue told AD that Trump is causing great unrest in the American LGBTQIA+ community. They all report an enormous increase in requests from Americans to find housing in the Netherlands. LGBT Asylum Support alone has received over 50 requests for aid since Trump took office.
“Our people are really afraid of persecution,” Wesley de Robles of Immigration Netherlands Services, an organization that helps American entrepreneurs obtain residency in the Netherlands via the Dutch-American Friendship Treaty (DAFT), told the newspaper. The treaty, intended to promote business relations, states that Americans who register as an entrepreneur with the Chamber of Commerce and present a business plan may be eligible for a residency permit.
According to De Robles, many transgender people, in particular, are using this route to flee the United States. “Since Trump, we have received around 30 applications every month, more than half of which come from the LGBTI community.” Before Trump, there were only a handful of applications per month.
The IND is also seeing an increase in asylum requests from Americans. In the first three months of 2025, there were 20 applications, while in previous years, between 9 and 19 Americans sought asylum in the Netherlands over a whole year. About half of the applicants are transgender, Transgender Network told AD, based on data from asylum doctors.
Fewer people use the official asylum route because the IND applies strict conditions. Only those who are at serious risk of persecution or inhumane treatment have a chance. LGBT Asylum Support has, therefore, asked Asylum Minister Marjolein Faber to “recognize the deteriorating situation for transgender people as a reason for asylum.”
But Faber refused. The PVV Minister responded that Trump’s policy “gives no reason to assume that transgender people should fear persecution.” So the conditions for asylum will remain unchanged, she said.
Americans living in the Netherlands will hold a protest in front of the American consulate on Saturday, one of the organizers told NL Times. The protest is not specifically due to Trump’s treatment of the LGBTQIA+ community, but against the American government’s “violation of due process rights” in general. This follows several immigrants being taken from American streets and detained in “a brutal prison in El Salvador.”
The demonstration will happen at 1:00 p.m. on Saturday in front of the American consulate on the Museumplein in Amsterdam, which is currently closed for renovations. “On April 19, we gather to say loudly and clearly: Hands Off Our Due Process Rights!” the organizer said.
Texas state Rep. Andy Hopper (R) displayed his ignorance about LGBTQ+ issues recently by making incorrect statements about intersex people during a House floor debate. Hopper made his comments while supporting an amendment to eliminate state funding to the University of Texas at Austin for offering its LGBTQ+ and diversity, equity, and inclusivity (DEI) programs and degree plans, Advocate reported.
Under questioning by state Rep. Lauren Ashley Simmons (D), Hopper first claimed that biological sex and gender identity are “one and the same.” Simmons replied, “That’s not true, but moving on,” and then asked about his thoughts on intersex people.
“I don’t even know what that means, ma’am,” Hopper replied before asking for a definition. A recording of his reply captured audible gasps and laughter at his response.
Intersex individuals have innate variations in physical traits that differ from typical expectations for male or female bodies, including variations in reproductive organs, hormones, or chromosome patterns. An estimated 1.7% of infants are born intersex — roughly the same number of people born with red hair. Many intersex individuals are forced to undergo irreversible surgeries to make their anatomies resemble stereotypical male or female bodies and are also subject to stigma and discrimination.
“You are not sure what intersex people are, if they exist or not, but you want to defund a program about something that you don’t understand,” she said. “That’s why I’m seeking clarification.”
She then said, “I’ll take it really slow: Since the beginning of time, people have been born with either ambiguous genitalia or with or without ovaries… And so, those people, from a biological standpoint, exist — they’re not mythical.”
“Those intersex individuals are still XX or XY,” Hopper said, referring to chromosomes that can determine someone’s biological sex. “So, you can’t change that.”
However, as soon as Hopper commented, state Rep. Valoree Swanson (R) whispered into Hopper’s ear, “Andy, that’s not true” — her words amplified by a microphone.
Intersex people can have variations in their sex chromosomes, including people with Jacob’s Syndrome (XYY), Klinefelter syndrome (XXY), and triple X syndrome (XXX).
Video of the interaction gained numerous web comments, with some critics saying that Hopper demonstrated why Republicans shouldn’t eliminate the Department of Education.
Republicans have largely opposed DEI and LGBTQ+ initiatives, calling them a divisive form of indoctrination.
Sir Keir Starmer must embrace Donald Trump’s agenda by repealing hate speech laws in order to get a trade deal over the line, sources close to JD Vance have told The Independent.
The warning came after the US vice-president suggested a UK-US agreement may be close, with the White House “working very hard” on it.
He told UnHerd: “I think there’s a good chance that, yes, we’ll come to a great agreement that’s in the best interest of both countries.”
But allies of Mr Vance say he is “obsessed by the fall of Western civilisation” – including his view that free speech is being eroded in Britain – and that he will demand the Labour government rolls back laws against hateful comments, including abuse targeting LGBT+ groups or other minorities, as a condition of any deal.
The Independent was told: “The vice-president expressing optimism [on a trade deal] is a way of putting further pressure on the UK over free speech. If a deal does not go through, it makes Labour look bad.”
Mr Vance’s recent speech to the right-wing Heritage Foundation think tank was cited as an example of his views on Western culture and free speech being linked to securing an agreement.
“No free speech, no deal. It is as simple as that,” the source close to the vice-president said.
It is understood that Britain has already offered to drop its proposed digital services tax as a means of getting a trade deal through. But the US wants to see laws on hate speech repealed as well as plans for a new online safety law dropped.
Labour has made it clear it is not prepared to go that far. A Downing Street source said the subject “is not a feature of the talks”.
However, the issue seems to be one of the main sticking points from the White House’s perspective.
Talks began last month after Sir Keir visited Mr Trump in the White House and intensified earlier this month with the tariffs announcement. While tariffs have been suspended for 90 days, the hope is that a deal can be done before they are brought into force.
Downing Street is aiming not for a traditional trade deal, but one focused on growth industries of the future, such as biotech and artificial intelligence.
Ministers insist this will not mean Britain has to accept imports of chlorinated chicken or beef with hormones, which have long been cited as concerns. However, they hope it will see most, if not all, tariffs removed between the two countries.
While Mr Trump’s trade secretary Howard Lutnick has taken a leading role in the talks with UK business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, the president announced at the start that Mr Vance would take the overall lead in the negotiations. UK sources have said he has been at the forefront of the tech side of the talks.
This has put the issue of free speech front and centre for Mr Vance and his allies in getting a deal with the UK.
It continued when Sir Keir visited the White House for the first time since Mr Trump took power and clashed with Mr Vance in front of the TV cameras in the Oval Office. The vice-president claimed that free speech was being undermined and also claimed that laws being brought in for online safety were an attack on US tech giants.
Most recently, the trial of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce for silently praying outside an abortion clinic has become a major issue in the US, with Mr Vance criticising the UK legal system over the case.
In his interview with UnHerd, the vice-president expressed optimism about the talks.
He said: “We’re certainly working very hard with Keir Starmer’s government.
“The president really loves the United Kingdom. He loved the Queen. He admires and loves the King. It is a very important relationship. And he’s a businessman and has a number of important business relationships in [Britain]. But I think it’s much deeper than that.
“There’s a real cultural affinity. And, of course, fundamentally, America is an Anglo country.”
Meanwhile, Mr Reynolds on Tuesday said he had been clear with US counterparts that he did not support Mr Trump’s approach on tariffs.
But he said there is a need in some instances to look at how to rebalance world trade to ensure greater fairness.
He said: “I don’t support the kind of approach to unilateral tariffs that the US has pursued. We’ve made that very clear to our US friends and colleagues, but there are issues as to how parts of trading works around the word, and there is a need to look at how we can do that fairly: how we can consider where in some cases countries are not operating to the same rules that we might expect here in the UK?”
The Independent is the world’s most free-thinking news brand, providing global news, commentary and analysis for the independently-minded. We have grown a huge, global readership of independently minded individuals, who value our trusted voice and commitment to positive change. Our mission, making change happen, has never been as important as it is today.
The UK supreme court has issued a historic and definitive ruling that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer only to a biological woman and to biological sex.
In a decision that delighted gender-critical activists, five judges ruled unanimously that the legal definition of a woman in the Equality Act 2010 did not include transgender women who hold gender recognition certificates (GRCs).
The judgment could have far-reaching ramifications and lead to greater restrictions on the access for trans women to services and spaces reserved for women. It prompted calls for the UK’s laws on gender recognition to be rewritten.
The UK government said the ruling brought “clarity and confidence” for women and those who run hospitals, sports clubs and women’s refuges.
A spokesperson said: “We have always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex. Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government.”
The case was brought to the supreme court by the gender-critical campaign group For Women Scotland, which is backed financially by JK Rowling, after two Scottish courts rejected its arguments that the Equality Act’s definition of a woman was limited to people born biologically female.
Lord Hodge, the deputy president of the court, said the Equality Act was very clear that its provisions dealt with biological sex at birth, and not with a person’s acquired gender, regardless of whether they held a gender recognition certificate.
That affected policymaking on gender in sports and the armed services, hospitals, as well as women-only charities, and access to changing rooms and women-only spaces, he said. However, trans women still have equal pay rights as women, and could have the right to be treated as women in some situations.
In its 88-page judgment, the court said that while the word “biological” did not appear in the definition of man or woman in the Equality Act, “the ordinary meaning of those plain and unambiguous words corresponds with the biological characteristics that make an individual a man or a woman”.
If “sex” did not only mean biological sex in the 2010 legislation, providers of single-sex spaces including changing rooms, homeless hostels and medical services would face “practical difficulties”, it said.
The justices added: “Read fairly and in context, the provisions relating to single-sex services can only be interpreted by reference to biological sex.”
The ruling represents a significant defeat for the Scottish government. For Women Scotland had initially challenged legislation that allowed trans women with a GRC to sit on public boards in posts reserved for women.
Scotland’s first minister, John Swinney, said his government accepted the court’s judgment. He said it clarified the limits of the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which introduced gender recognition certificates for trans people.
“We will now engage on the implications of the ruling,” he said. “Protecting the rights of all will underpin our actions.”
The Scottish government defended its actions in the case, which it said were always guided by the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s advice. It said it would now engage with UK ministers and with the EHRC to look at the ruling’s implications, since the legislation involved was passed by Westminster.
Trans rights campaigners urged trans people and their supporters to remain calm about the decision.
The campaign group Scottish Trans said: “We are really shocked by today’s supreme court decision, which reverses 20 years of understanding of how the law recognises trans men and women with gender recognition certificates.
“We will continue working for a world in which trans people can get on with their lives with privacy, dignity and safety. That is something we all deserve.”
Sacha Deshmukh, the chief executive of the human rights group Amnesty International UK, which joined with the Scottish government in the supreme court case, said the decision was “clearly disappointing”.
“There are potentially concerning consequences for trans people, but it is important to stress that the court has been clear that trans people are protected under the Equality Act against discrimination and harassment,” he said.
“The ruling does not change the protection trans people are afforded under the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’, as well as other provisions under the Equality Act.”
Susan Smith, a co-founder of For Women Scotland, said the legal action had been “a really, really long road”. “Today the judges have said what we always believed to be the case, that women are protected by their biological sex,” she said.
“Sex is real and women can now feel safe that services and spaces designated for women are for women and we are enormously grateful to the supreme court for this ruling.”
In a social media post, JK Rowling said: “It took three extraordinary, tenacious Scottish women with an army behind them to get this case heard by the supreme court,” adding: “I’m so proud to know you.”
Hodge, the deputy president of the court, said it believed the position taken by the Scottish government and the EHRC that people with gender recognition certificates did qualify as women, while those without did not, created “two sub-groups”.
This would confuse any organisations they were involved with. A public body could not know whether a trans woman did or did not have that certificate because the information was private and confidential.
And allowing trans women the same legal status as biological women could also affect spaces and services designed specifically for lesbians, who had also suffered historical discrimination and abuse.
Kishwer Falkner, the chair of the EHRC, said it was pleased the ruling had dealt with its concerns about the lack of clarity around single-sex and lesbian-only spaces, but would need time to fully understand its implications.
“We are pleased that this judgment addresses several of the difficulties we highlighted in our submission to the court, including the challenges faced by those seeking to maintain single-sex spaces, and the rights of same-sex attracted persons to form associations.”
Hungary’s parliament on Monday passed an amendment to the constitution that allows the government to ban public events by LGBTQ+ communities, a decision that legal scholars and critics call another step toward authoritarianism by the populist government.
The amendment, which required a two-thirds vote, passed along party lines with 140 votes for and 21 against. It was proposed by the ruling Fidesz-KDNP coalition led by populist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
Ahead of the vote — the final step for the amendment — opposition politicians and other protesters attempted to blockade the entrance to a parliament parking garage. Police physically removed demonstrators, who had used zip ties to bind themselves together.
The amendment declares that children’s rights to moral, physical and spiritual development supersede any right other than the right to life, including that to peacefully assemble. Hungary’s contentious “child protection” legislation prohibits the “depiction or promotion” of homosexuality to minors aged under 18.
The amendment codifies a law fast-tracked through parliament in March that bans public events held by LGBTQ+ communities, including the popular Pride event in Budapest that draws thousands annually.
That law also allows authorities to use facial recognition tools to identify people who attend prohibited events — such as Budapest Pride — and can come with fines of up to 200,000 Hungarian forints ($546).
Dávid Bedő, a lawmaker with the opposition Momentum party who participated in the attempted blockade, said before the vote that Orbán and Fidesz for the past 15 years “have been dismantling democracy and the rule of law, and in the past two or three months, we see that this process has been sped up.”
He said as elections approach in 2026 and Orbán’s party lags in the polls behind a popular new challenger from the opposition, “they will do everything in their power to stay in power.”
Opposition lawmakers used air horns to disrupt the vote, which continued after a few moments.
Hungary’s government has campaigned against LGBTQ+ communities in recent years, and argues its “child protection” policies, which forbid the availability to minors of any material that mentions homosexuality, are needed to protect children from what it calls “woke ideology” and “gender madness.”
Critics say the measures do little to protect children and are being used to distract from more serious problems facing the country and mobilize Orbán’s right-wing base ahead of elections.
“This whole endeavor which we see launched by the government, it has nothing to do with children’s rights,” said Dánel Döbrentey, a lawyer with the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, calling it “pure propaganda.”
Constitution recognizes two sexes
The new amendment also states that the constitution recognizes two sexes, male and female, an expansion of an earlier amendment that prohibits same-sex adoption by stating that a mother is a woman and a father is a man.
The declaration provides a constitutional basis for denying the gender identities of transgender people, as well as ignoring the existence of intersex individuals who are born with sexual characteristics that do not align with binary conceptions of male and female.
In a statement on Monday, government spokesperson Zoltán Kovács wrote that the change is “not an attack on individual self-expression, but a clarification that legal norms are based on biological reality.”
Döbrentey, the lawyer, said it was “a clear message” for transgender and intersex people: “It is definitely and purely and strictly about humiliating people and excluding them, not just from the national community, but even from the community of human beings.”
The amendment is the 15th to Hungary’s constitution since Orbán’s party unilaterally authored and approved it in 2011.
Facial recognition to identify demonstrators
Ádám Remport, a lawyer with the HCLU, said that while Hungary has used facial recognition tools since 2015 to assist police in criminal investigations and finding missing persons, the recent law banning Pride allows the technology to be used in a much broader and problematic manner. That includes for monitoring and deterring political protests.
“One of the most fundamental problems is its invasiveness, just the sheer scale of the intrusion that happens when you apply mass surveillance to a crowd,” Remport said.
“More salient in this case is the effect on the freedom of assembly, specifically the chilling effect that arises when people are scared to go out and show their political or ideological beliefs for fear of being persecuted,” he added.
Suspension of citizenship
The amendment passed Monday also allows for Hungarians who hold dual citizenship in a non-European Economic Area country to have their citizenship suspended for up to 10 years if they are deemed to pose a threat to public order, public security or national security.
Hungary has taken steps in recent months to protect its national sovereignty from what it claims are foreign efforts to influence its politics or even topple Orbán’s government.
The self-described “illiberal” leader has accelerated his longstanding efforts to crack down on critics such as media outlets and groups devoted to civil rights and anti-corruption, which he says have undermined Hungary’s sovereignty by receiving financial assistance from international donors.
In a speech laden with conspiracy theories in March, Orbán compared people who work for such groups to insects, and pledged to “eliminate the entire shadow army” of foreign-funded “politicians, judges, journalists, pseudo-NGOs and political activists.”
Mehmet Oz, the newly confirmed administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), is telling state Medicaid officials to stop covering gender-affirming care for transgender youth. Medicaid is the joint state-federal program that covers health care for people with low incomes, including 40% of minors in the U.S.
A letter sent from the CMS to state Medicaid directors said that the program should stop reimbursing gender-affirming care for minors, including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgical interventions. The letter says that there is an “underdeveloped body of evidence” supporting gender-affirming care despite the research showing that it’s a safe and effective treatment for gender dysphoria, which is supported by all major medical organizations in the U.S. The letter also cites the U.K.’s “Cass review,” a report on gender-affirming care that has been criticized for its bias against transgender people.
In a statement, Oz – who was confirmed by the Senate earlier this month – said that gender-affirming care can lead to sterilization, and that’s why the CMS is cracking down on it.
“Medicaid dollars are not to be used for gender reassignment surgeries or hormone treatments in minors – procedures that can cause permanent, irreversible harm, including sterilization. CMS will not support services that violate this standard or place vulnerable children at risk.”
Republicans in the Senate at first balked at Oz’s nomination, not due to his lack of qualifications for leading the agency but because he had, on television, expressed more liberal views when it came to acknowledging that trans kids exist and supporting reproductive freedom. The White House assured Senate Republicans that Oz is now transphobic.
Taking away health care from trans minors in low-income families just a week into his tenure at the CMS may reassure Republicans of Oz’s conservative credentials.
In January, the president signed an executive order targeting gender-affirming care for trans minors and some young adults. The order told the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) – under which the CMS is organized – to “take all appropriate actions to end the chemical and surgical mutilation of children,” including by changing “Medicare or Medicaid conditions of participation or conditions for coverage.” Referring to gender-affirming care as “mutilation” is a tactic used by anti-transgender activists to sway public opinion against the care that has been shown to save lives.
Former HHS official Adrian Shanker, who worked at the department under former President Joe Biden, said that the CMS letter misuses regulations to limit gender-affirming care coverage.
“I don’t think this letter is using those regulations in good faith,” Shanker told Advocate. “This letter is using highly politicized language that is not grounded in the mountain of evidence that supports the underlying health and well-being of trans youth.”
“It frankly looks like a campaign document,” he continued. “It looks like a document written by anti-trans activists rather than by public health professionals and health care leaders.”
Shanker pointed out that the letter itself is not legally binding but that it will lead states to cut off coverage for gender-affirming care.
“The significant fear here is that this ‘Dear State Medicaid Director’ letter will be utilized to preclude access to care even further in some states,” he said. “And the risk of that is actually very significant because we have incredible amounts of data that confirms the health impacts of denying access to care for trans youth.”
In 2015, trans reality TV personality and author Jazz Jennings appeared on Oz’s talk show, and he complimented her mother for being supportive.
“I love the support you’ve given your daughter,” Oz said. “It’s wonderful. And you can see the beautiful young woman she’s becoming because of it.”
This was before Oz entered the political realm. The exchange, though, led to Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) sending a letter demanding the administration explain the ten-year-old episode.
“Have your views on this issue changed since you hosted your television show?” Hawley’s letter demanded, asking if Oz supports the administration’s position that “gender transition procedures for minors should be banned.”
In a statement, a spokesperson for the White House said that Oz would follow the president’s views on the matter, saying that everyone in the administration will follow his “playbook.”
A Florida teacher has lost her job for calling a student by their preferred name without obtaining parental consent. Melissa Calhoun has taught in Brevard County for 11 years and is thought to be the first to fall prey to a new state policy requiring parents to sign a consent form for a student to go by something other than their legal name at school.
Administrators at Brevard County’s Satellite High School decided not to renew Calhoun’s contract for the 2025-2026 school year after a parent complained she’d been calling their child something other than their legal name. The student’s gender identity has not been revealed, but Florida Today reported that “community members believe” the case is “related to the student’s gender identity.”
The parental consent rule—which was signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) in 2023—does not specify the consequences for breaking it, but the school chose not to renew Calhoun’s contract since the state will now be reviewing her teaching contract due to the parent’s complaint, district spokeswoman Janet Murnaghan explained to the Washington Post. She has, however, been permitted to finish the school year.
“Teachers, like all employees, are expected to follow the law,” Murnaghan said.
But many in the Brevard County community are not on board with the school’s decision. Many people showed up to advocate for Calhoun at a recent school board meeting, even though her issue was not on the agenda.
“There was no harm, no threat to safety… Just a teacher trying to connect with a student. And for that her contract was not renewed, despite her strong dedication and years of service,” the school’s media specialist, Kristine Staniec, whose kids were taught by Calhoun, reportedly told the board.
Over 12,000 people have signed a Change.org petition to reinstate Calhoun, calling her “a cherished teacher” and “dedicated educator” who “is being punished merely for showing respect to a student’s choices.”
“Ms. Calhoun is an embodiment of what proper education should be: inclusive, understanding, and respectful of individuality,” the petition continued. “Losing her would be a significant loss to Brevard County’s education community.”
Brian Dittmeier, director of public policy for LGBTQ+ student advocacy organization GLSEN, told the Post that Calhoun’s firing “is an indicator of bureaucratic overreach of antitransgender policy,” in addition to the blatant anti-trans attacks it represents.
“A teacher could potentially be fired for calling a student Tim instead of Timothy,” he emphasized, pointing out how anti-trans laws hurt everyone in the end.
fleeredstates.blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.