National Park Service cracks down on Pride leaving LGBTQ+ rangers feeling betrayed

This blog is originally appeared at Advocate.

On May 17, the National Park Service (NPS) made an official ruling that park rangers and other employees are no longer allowed to attend Pride events and parades in uniform. This marks a reversal of a long-standing tradition of NPS participation in Pride parades across the U.S., including the presence of official delegations. Anonymous LGBTQ+ NPS employees have expressed feelings of betrayal, noting that participation in major city Pride events is now in question, as several parade applications remain unprocessed and approvals are unclear. The decision comes at a time of heightened scrutiny on LGBTQ+ issues nationwide, with increasing crackdowns on Pride flags and LGBTQ+ rights—largely driven by Republican lawmakers and appointees. This time, however, the policy change is being driven by the NPS itself, under the leadership of a director appointed by President Biden.

The new directive was first shared in an internal memo to NPS staff, which did not specifically mention Pride but highlighted that “requests from employees asking to participate in uniform in a variety of events and activities, including events not organized by the NPS,” are in conflict with agency policy. The memo cited a policy stating that NPS employees cannot wear their uniforms to events that might be interpreted as supporting “a particular issue, position, or political party.” LGBTQ+ employees, however, have criticized this application of the policy, arguing that Pride is about identity and diversity, not a political stance or issue. They pointed out that under the previous guidelines, NPS employees were able to participate in Pride events with approval, and that internal Employee Resource Group (ERG) documents, such as the “OUTsiders Guide to Pride,” had endorsed such participation for years.

In a follow-up statement, the NPS argued that the ERG guide conflicts with official policy and that discussions are underway to review it and other related documents. The agency also emphasized that its participation in Pride celebrations could be perceived as an endorsement of a particular “issue of public concern,” which they described as a justification for limiting official participation. In their view, what has long been seen as a celebration of diversity and inclusion is now categorized as a political statement, with the NPS deeming official participation in such events “extremely limited.”

The decision sparked immediate concern among National Park Service employees and LGBTQ+ advocates. Many pointed out that the NPS has a long history of participating in Pride parades across the country, even under the Trump administration, which was known for its efforts to restrict LGBTQ+ representation in federal agencies, including at embassies. Employees also highlighted the significant role the NPS plays in managing Stonewall National Monument, a site dedicated to LGBTQ+ history and civil rights. Notably, the founding documents of Stonewall National Monument explicitly state that its purpose is “to preserve and protect Christopher Park and the historic resources associated with it” and “to interpret the Stonewall National Historic Landmark’s resources and values related to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender civil rights movement.” This has raised questions about how the NPS can reconcile this mission with its new stance on Pride participation.

One NPS employee, speaking anonymously, revealed that several requests for Pride parade participation are currently “collecting dust” on desks, waiting for approval for representation in major city Pride events. When asked about the decision to categorize Pride festivals as an “issue of public concern,” the employee responded, “Pride is not political, it’s not a cause, you just are LGBTQ+. It’s a celebration of who we are.” They added, “Morale is just so low right now. There’s not a lot of fight left in us.”

I reached out to an NPS spokesperson for clarification on whether the agency would continue participating in major city Pride events this year, as it has in previous years. The spokesperson responded that the policy “had not changed,” noting that “previous interpretations of the uniform policy were inconsistent” and that approving participation in some events while denying others could be perceived as “discrimination based on viewpoint.” While the spokesperson confirmed that in-park Pride events have not been canceled, they did not clarify whether NPS employees would continue to participate in major U.S. city Pride parades or celebrations. Attempts to follow up on this question went unanswered.

The characterization of Pride as a potentially “political” event raises concerns, particularly given the founding documents of Stonewall National Monument, which directly reference the “resources and values” of the LGBTQ+ community. NPS resources currently available on the site encourage people to “Celebrate Pride” and emphasize that “The LGBTQ experience is a vital facet of America’s rich and diverse past.” The resource underscores the importance of not making LGBTQ+ people invisible, stating, “By recovering the voices that have been erased and marginalized, the NPS embarks on an important project to capture and celebrate our multi-vocal past.” By barring employees from wearing Pride symbols or participating in Pride events, the NPS may unintentionally appear to be erasing and marginalizing its LGBTQ+ employees—contradicting its own stated mission.

National Park Service employees have marched in uniform in Pride parades for years. In 2014, for example, Christine Lenhertz, a member of the NPS, requested permission for a group of LGBTQ+ park employees to wear their uniforms while participating in a Pride parade. Initially denied, the group filed a complaint, prompting a ruling from the Office of the Solicitor for the Department of the Interior, which determined there was no reason to prevent them from marching in uniform. Since then, NPS contingents have regularly participated in Pride events across the country.

The future of Pride parade participation for NPS employees in uniform remains uncertain. While it seems that some Pride events within National Parks, like those at Stonewall, may still take place, external participation in major city Pride events appears to be on hold in at least some locations across the U.S. The possibility of individual or smaller LGBTQ+-affiliated Park Ranger contingents joining city Pride celebrations looks even less likely, with little hope of approval for participation.

You can read the full response from an NPS spokesperson to the request for comment here:

LGBTQ+ rights have long been at the mercy of public opinion. This November will be no different.

This blog is originally appeared at LGBTQ Nation.

LGBTQ+ ballot initiatives have long served as a wedge issue, mobilizing conservative voters and influencing the rights and freedoms typically protected by law. The 2024 election follows this tradition, with LGBTQ+ civil rights once again being subjected to public debate.

In New York, voters will decide whether to include sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression in the state’s anti-discrimination amendment. Meanwhile, reproductive rights will also be up for a vote in 10 other states.

California, Colorado, and Hawaii voters will decide this November whether to repeal their states’ constitutional bans on same-sex marriage.

Since 1998, same-sex unions have consistently been the top issue on state referendums. In that time, 34 states have put the question to voters, with many passing constitutional amendments that prohibited same-sex marriage. These amendments were often used as a political tool to mobilize conservative voters, particularly in the 2004 election when 11 states approved such bans, helping to boost George W. Bush’s campaign.

Marriage equality consistently lost at the ballot box until 2012, when voters in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington approved same-sex marriage, signaling a shift in public opinion that had been building since around 2009, when support for same-sex marriage crossed the 50% threshold in national polls.

In 2015, the Supreme Court’s landmark Obergefell v. Hodges decision struck down all state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage, declaring such bans unconstitutional. However, these amendments remain in place in several state constitutions. Activists are now pushing to repeal them, especially in light of concerns that the conservative-leaning Supreme Court could overturn Obergefell, as Justice Clarence Thomas hinted after the court struck down Roe v. Wade.

The Origins of Ballot Initiatives on LGBTQ+ Rights

California’s 1978 election introduced the first state ballot initiative related to LGBTQ+ rights—Proposition 6, also known as the Briggs Initiative. Sponsored by Orange County legislator John Briggs, the initiative sought to ban anyone who engaged in “public homosexual activity” from working in California public schools. The proposal was part of a broader wave of anti-gay activism spurred by Anita Bryant’s 1977 “Save Our Children” campaign in Florida, which successfully repealed Dade County’s anti-discrimination ordinance based on sexual orientation. Harvey Milk played a pivotal role in organizing the opposition to Prop 6, which was defeated by a 16-point margin.

Since then, other states have introduced ballot initiatives aimed at legalizing or banning discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Over time, voters have increasingly supported anti-discrimination measures. In 1988, Oregon voters overturned the governor’s authority to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. In 2018, Massachusetts voters upheld a law prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity.

Maine and Oregon: Key States in the Fight for LGBTQ+ Rights

Maine and Oregon have consistently put LGBTQ+ rights to a vote. In Maine, voters initially blocked same-sex marriage in 2009, but then approved it by the same 53% margin in 2012. Maine also rejected anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination protections in 1998 and 2000, only to approve them in 2005. In Oregon, voters defeated a “don’t say gay” measure in 2000 by a narrow 5.7% margin.

Many states also used ballot measures to resist the inclusion of sexual orientation as a protected identity in anti-discrimination laws. In the 1990s, voters in Oregon, Idaho, and Maine approved such measures, protecting sexual orientation as a legally recognized identity.

The Impact of Other Ballot Measures on LGBTQ+ Rights

It’s not just LGBTQ+-specific ballot measures that impact the community. Other laws, such as voter ID requirements in Arkansas and North Carolina, disproportionately affect trans individuals and other marginalized LGBTQ+ people, limiting their ability to vote.

In addition to these referendums, the candidates voters elect at the state level will play a critical role in shaping LGBTQ+ rights. Republican-led legislatures have introduced or passed hundreds of bills targeting LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly in areas such as gender-affirming health care, bathroom access, inclusive education, and sports participation. Supporting state-level and local candidates who champion LGBTQ+ rights will have long-term implications, even if certain issues are not directly decided by referendum.

Civil Rights and Public Opinion

The fight for civil rights has a long history of being put to public referendum. Since 1868, issues related to race, sex, and disability have often been decided by voters, with initial support for discrimination gradually giving way to support for equality. While women’s rights gained public approval in the 1970s, LGBTQ+ rights did not see widespread support until the 2000s.

The question of whether civil rights should be determined by public opinion, rather than by courts or legislatures, has allowed forms of discrimination—such as racism, sexism, and homophobia—to become entrenched in law. Although public opinion on LGBTQ+ rights is often divided and fluid, most polls now show a majority in favor of anti-discrimination laws for LGBTQ+ individuals.

The Importance of Voting

With LGBTQ+ rights on the ballot this November, it’s more crucial than ever to vote. In addition to ballot measures, the elected officials who hold office at the state and local levels will have the power to pass or block pro-equality legislation, impacting LGBTQ+ rights for years to come. Whether through referendums or legislative action, LGBTQ+ rights remain at stake, and your vote matters.

Make your voice heard—not just on ballot measures, but by choosing candidates who will protect and advance equality for all.

Pizzeria Employee Hospitalized After Homophobic Mob Attacks Restaurant Over Pride Flag Display

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION

Police in Roseville, California, are searching for three suspects in connection with a hate crime at a Blaze Pizza restaurant, where workers were assaulted after one suspect tore down a Pride flag on display. The assault was captured on a smartphone video.

The incident took place at 10:50 p.m. on a Thursday when a food delivery driver entered the restaurant, noticed the Pride flag near the register, and threw it to the ground. When the store manager and employees confronted him, the man allegedly used a homophobic slur before leaving. He later returned with two other men, who then attacked the restaurant staff.

Related:

Republicans terrorized a gay couple’s home. What happened next surprised the couple.

Haters yelled obscenties, sent a threatening letter, and vandalized their Pride flag and political signs. But the reaction has emboldened the targeted men.

A witness named Chance Chacon told KCRA that the manager and employee had defended the flag’s display, but then, when the three assailants returned, “It was like a mob. They were just kind of swinging at him.”

A video captured inside the restaurant shows one worker repeatedly shouting at the assailants, “Get the f**k out of here!” while another employee urges a co-worker to “Call the cops.”

The three men fled the scene before police arrived, but an ambulance later transported one employee on a stretcher. This worker was taken to the hospital, where he was briefly treated for a concussion and head trauma but has since been released.

A still image from the footage shows a shoeless, light-skinned suspect wearing a torn dark-colored t-shirt and hand wraps commonly used in mixed martial arts.

Police have asked for the public’s help in identifying the assailants involved in the September 20 incident. Anyone with information can submit an anonymous tip online or contact their non-emergency line at 916-774-5000.

Ruby Shields, a lesbian who owns a restaurant in the nearby town of Granite Bay, told The Sacramento Bee that she doesn’t consider the area LGBTQ+ friendly. She has been too scared to display a rainbow flag at her own restaurant, and is often mistaken as the wife of her male business partner, even though she has a wife.

“We’ve been looked at with respect, but it’s always on the back of your mind, you know, ‘Should I be saying this?’” Shields said of not knowing whether to come out to restaurant patrons. “It’s not even something that I really even want to put out there because you never know. I mean, it’s horrible that it’s so close to home. Roseville is right down the street from where we’re at.”

This wouldn’t be the first time that an anti-LGBTQ+ person has committed violence in California after tearing down a Pride flag. Last August, Travis Ikeguchi — a 27-year-old man who posted anti-LGBTQ+, antisemitic, anti-vaccination Christian Nationalist content online — murdered Laura Ann Carleton, a 66-year-old LGBTQ+ ally and mother of nine, complained about the Pride flag hanging in front of her Cedar Glen, California business.

Police killed Ikeguchi shortly afterward.

Paul Feig — the director of BridesmaidsGhostbusters (2016), and other films — wrote, “We are all devastated for her husband Bort and her family and the LGBTQ+ community, for whom Lauri was such a true ally…. This intolerance has to end. Anyone using hateful language against the LGBTQ+ community has to realize their words matter, that their words can inspire violence against innocent loving people. Let’s all keep moving forward with tolerance and love. Let’s not let Lauri’s tragic death be in vain.”

Carleton’s friend, director Paul Feig, wrote of the incident, “Lauri Carleton was my friend. She was a wonderful person who did so much for the LGBTQ+ community as well as the community at large. What happened to her is an absolute tragedy. If people don’t think anti-gay & trans rhetoric isn’t dangerous, think again.”

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.

Thailand Becomes First Southeast Asian Country to Legalize Marriage Equality

This blog originally appeared at Kxan In-Depth Investigative.

In a major win for LGBTQ+ rights, Thailand has become the first Southeast Asian country to legalize same-sex marriage.

The bill, passed by Parliament earlier this year, was signed into law by King Maha Vajiralongkorn on Tuesday through Royal Assent. The law will take effect in 120 days, with the first same-sex weddings anticipated in January.

Siritata Ninlapruek, an LGBTQ+ activist, expressed, “We are all delighted and excited. We’ve been fighting for our rights for over ten years, and now it’s finally happening.”

With this historic change, marriage laws in Thailand will no longer use gendered terms like “husband” and “wife,” replacing them with inclusive, gender-neutral terms like “partner.” Same-sex couples now enjoy the same legal rights as their heterosexual counterparts, including adoption and inheritance rights.

Waaddao Chumaporn, another LGBTQ+ rights advocate, told AFP, “The law is a monumental step towards equal rights in Thailand.”

Chumaporn is planning a mass wedding for over a thousand LGBTQ+ couples in Bangkok on January 22, the first day same-sex couples can legally marry.

Though Thailand is known for being more accepting of LGBTQ+ individuals compared to neighboring countries, the legalization of same-sex marriage comes after years of political challenges. LGBTQ+ advocates like Apiwat Apiwatsayree have been waiting for this moment for over a decade.

“We’ve been waiting for a long time,” said Apiwat, who plans to marry his partner of 17 years.

Human rights and LGBTQ+ organizations worldwide celebrated this achievement. Amnesty International’s Thailand Researcher, Chanatip Tatiyakaroonwong, remarked, “Thailand has taken a historic step towards becoming the first country in Southeast Asia to legalize marriage for LGBTI couples. This landmark moment is a reward for the tireless work of activists, civil society organizations, and lawmakers who have fought for this victory.”

Thai Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin made marriage equality a key issue during his tenure, driving the law forward.

Srettha shared on X, “Another important step for Thailand. The same-sex marriage law passes. Equality is concrete here in Thailand.”

For more updates on LGBTQ+ issues worldwide, subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter to stay informed about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities globally.

Federal Bill Advancing to Require Schools to Disclose Trans Students’ Identities Passes Key Committee Vote

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

A House committee has advanced a controversial bill, H.R. 736, known as the “PROTECT Kids Act,” which would require schools to disclose transgender students’ identities to their parents if the students request to use different pronouns, a new name, or facilities aligned with their gender identity. The bill, introduced by Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), would enforce this policy on all elementary and middle schools that receive federal funding, threatening to withhold funds from any school that does not comply.

Rep. Walberg, who has a history of supporting Uganda’s anti-LGBTQ+ laws, stated that parents should be informed of all decisions affecting their children. He argues that the bill would “safeguard parental rights by requiring parental consent and will help mitigate under-the-radar activism in our schools.” However, critics, including Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI), chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, have condemned the bill as an attack on transgender students, warning that it could put vulnerable kids at risk, particularly those without supportive families.

The bill passed the House Committee on Education and the Workforce with a 22-12 vote and will now proceed to the House floor for consideration. While it may pass the Republican-controlled House, it faces significant opposition in the Democratic Senate, and President Joe Biden is unlikely to sign it into law, as it contradicts his administration’s policies on LGBTQ+ rights.

Republicans Targeted a Gay Couple’s Home—What Happened Next Was Unexpected

This blog originally appeared at LGBTQ NATION.

Christopher Cole and his husband, longtime residents of the predominantly Republican and predominantly white town of Watertown, Connecticut, received a racist and homophobic letter last Friday afternoon. The letter, referencing their Democratic yard signs and the rainbow flag displayed in their front yard, was typed and anonymous. Later that same night, a group of men trespassed onto their property, stealing both the signs and the flag.

Although police say the perpetrators may never be caught, Cole—a vocal community activist—told LGBTQ Nation that he refuses to be intimidated. He and his husband have already replaced the stolen items and have been met with overwhelming support from the community, local news outlets, and even their congresswoman.

The letter, signed by someone identifying as “Americans that care,” specifically targeted the yard signs supporting the Democratic presidential ticket, Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, as well as Black Congressional candidate Jahana Hayes. The entire hateful incident was caught on camera.

Related:

Vandals cowardly defaced a queer family’s Pride flag by urinating on it before fleeing the scene. The entire disturbing act was captured on camera.

The letter sent to Christopher Cole and his husband, signed by someone calling themselves “Americans that care,” specifically mentioned the Democratic yard signs they had displayed in support of Vice President Kamala Harris, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, and Black Congressional candidate Jahana Hayes.

“If you knew how goddamn foolish your rah-rah for Karmonkey and Tennessee Waltz look on your house, you’d take it down along with your Nobodywana Hayes sign and especially the Prideless flag on your front door you could use for toilet paper,” the letter said. “All I can think of you is you must be a Dumbocrat. So I feel sorry for you.”

Around 10:38 p.m., roughly seven hours after receiving a hateful letter, Christopher Cole’s security camera captured footage of a white individual wearing a dark hoodie and facemask vandalizing the rainbow flag that had flown from his home for the past 14 years. The person tore the flag down and fled, while the camera’s audio picked up the sound of him and other men shouting indistinctly.

Cole and his husband were awake in their home at the time but didn’t realize what had occurred until the following morning when Cole’s husband let their dog outside and discovered the missing flag and signs.

Cole shared images of the letter and video footage of the vandal on his Facebook page. By the next evening, he had replaced the stolen signs and flag, posting images of the new ones alongside a Bible verse from Matthew 5:39: “But I say to you: Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.”

“Even though we’re in Connecticut, this is a very red town, and there are Trump signs everywhere,” Cole told LGBTQ Nation. He noted that the flag had been flying for 14 years, though it had often attracted hostile reactions. People driving by would shout, “Are you f**king kidding me?” or “What the hell is wrong with you?” On one occasion, a truck driver revved its engine and spun its wheels near their yard, filling it with smoke, and during that incident, someone stole three of their signs.

Despite such incidents, Cole had dismissed these individuals as “immature, crazy people.” However, he found the racist, homophobic, and misogynistic language in the letter “really concerning.”

“It’s one thing to yell obscenities from the street, but to come onto someone’s property, rip down something that represents them, and steal their political signs is crossing a line. We felt violated, unsafe, and intimidated, so we called the police.”

Cole provided the authorities with the letter and security footage, but officers informed him that without further evidence, identifying the perpetrator would be difficult. Watertown Police Chief Joshua Bernegger told local news station WTNH that, “There’s no indication within the letter that it was motivated by hate or against any protected class of individual,” despite the clear threats.

In a statement, the Watertown Police Department emphasized, “We take this crime very seriously. No citizen should be subject to fear and intimidation tactics based on their political affiliation.”

Cole shared that, for the most part, the rainbow flag has inspired positive responses, including a crayon drawing from a six-year-old depicting Cole and his husband with the flag, and an eight-page letter from a 15-year-old high school student who wrote that seeing the flag every day gave her the courage to come out. Over the years, he has seen other rainbow flags appear in his neighborhood, inspired by his own.

In the wake of the vandalism, Cole and his husband were moved by the support from their community. Neighbors brought over replacement signs and banners, and their next-door neighbor even put up a larger Pride flag than the one that was torn down. Four news stations covered the incident, and Cole and his husband replaced the stolen signs with even bigger ones.

On Sunday morning, as news of the vandalism spread, Congresswoman Jahana Hayes, whose campaign sign had been in Cole’s yard, called him directly at 8:45 a.m. She expressed her support for Cole and his husband and apologized that their backing of her campaign had resulted in their home being targeted.

She joined Cole and his husband at their local church that morning, offering her admiration for their courage and refusal to be intimidated. Cole is active in the United Church of Christ, a progressive Christian church, where he has helped make the congregation more inclusive of LGBTQ+ people. The process was contentious, with some members leaving and others posting hateful comments on social media.

Cole also serves as the executive director of APNH (A Place to Nourish Your Health), an LGBTQ+-inclusive community health center in nearby New Haven that supports people affected by HIV, substance use, and mental health conditions. Having experienced severe bullying as a child, Cole refuses to back down now in the face of harassment.

“Especially in a very conservative town, I am committed to being an activist and speaking out. It makes a bigger impact here than in places like West Hollywood or the Upper West Side of Manhattan, where there are thousands of Pride flags. It’s a different story when you’re the only one flying a flag in a place like this, and the only church that does that.”

“I’m committed to not being silenced, to standing strong and shining light where there is darkness. In this political climate, where some think it’s okay to intimidate and spread hate, I won’t shrink back—and no one else should either.”

Red Sox’s Jarren Duran Suspended for Two Games After Using Anti-Gay Slur Toward Fan

This blog originally appeared at THEM.

The salary Duran forfeits due to his suspension will be donated to PFLAG.

Boston Red Sox player Jarren Duran was suspended for two games without pay on Monday after directing a homophobic slur at a fan. The incident occurred during Sunday’s game against the Houston Astros at Fenway Park when the 27-year-old outfielder was at bat and was being heckled by a fan.

“Tennis racket!” the fan shouted, according to the Associated Press. “You need a tennis racket!”

In response, Duran turned around and yelled, “Shut up, you fucking faggot!”

After the game, the Red Sox released a statement in which Duran apologized for his actions.

“During tonight’s game, I used a truly horrific word when responding to a fan,” Duran said, apologizing to “the entire Red Sox organization, but more importantly to the entire LGBTQ community.”

“Our young fans should be able to look up to me as a role model, but tonight I fell far short of that responsibility,” he continued. “I will use this opportunity to educate myself, my teammates, and to grow as a person.”

In an August 12 statement, the Red Sox announced that, in consultation with Major League Baseball (MLB), Duran has been issued a two-game unpaid suspension starting with Monday night’s game against the Texas Rangers. His salary from the suspension — amounting to $8,172, according to ESPN — will be donated to the LGBTQ+ organization PFLAG, previously known as Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.

This isn’t the first time an MLB player has been suspended for using an anti-gay slur. In 2017, the league banned Toronto Blue Jays star Kevin Pillar for two games after he directed a homophobic slur at Atlanta player Jason Motte. That same year, Oakland Athletics outfielder Matt Joyce was also suspended for two games after using a slur toward a fan. Back in 2012, Blue Jays player Yunel Escobar received a three-game suspension for wearing eye-black strips with a Spanish anti-gay slur written on them.

Read more.

The Nebraska Supreme Court has upheld a law that restricts both medical care for transgender youth and abortion access

This blog originally appeared at ABC NEWS.

The Nebraska Supreme Court has upheld a law that restricts access to both medical care for transgender youth and abortion.

OMAHA, Neb. — The Nebraska Supreme Court has ruled that a state law combining abortion restrictions with measures limiting gender-affirming health care for minors does not breach a state constitutional amendment requiring bills to address only one subject.

The court acknowledged that abortion and gender-affirming care are distinct types of medical care but concluded that the law falls under the broad category of medical care, thus complying with Nebraska’s single-subject rule. Chief Justice Mike Heavican, writing for the majority, referred to an 1895 ruling, emphasizing that a bill with a general object and a title that fairly expresses the subject does not violate the single-subject rule.

The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland. The lawsuit challenged the law, which restricts abortion to 12 weeks of pregnancy, bans gender-confirming surgery, and limits hormone treatments for transgender minors. The ACLU’s arguments that the hybrid law violated Nebraska’s single-subject rule were rejected by the high court.

Originally, Nebraska lawmakers proposed separate bills: one banning abortion at around six weeks of pregnancy and another restricting gender-affirming treatments for minors. The Legislature combined these measures into a single bill after the six-week abortion ban faced a filibuster. This combination was one of the most controversial pieces of legislation in the 2023 session, leading to an extended filibuster by some lawmakers.

A district judge had previously dismissed the lawsuit, prompting the ACLU to appeal. During the high court arguments, state attorneys argued that combining the measures under health care did not breach the single-subject rule, while Planned Parenthood contended that the Legislature had recognized abortion and transgender care as separate issues by introducing them as distinct bills.

Justice Lindsey Miller-Lerman’s dissent criticized the majority for applying inconsistent standards, accusing the court of giving undue leeway to the Legislature. She argued that the bill should have adhered strictly to the constitutional requirement for a single subject.

Opponents of the ruling expressed disappointment. ACLU Nebraska Executive Director Mindy Rush Chipman and Planned Parenthood North Central States President and CEO Ruth Richardson criticized the decision, emphasizing its potential negative impacts on Nebraskans, particularly in rural areas and among marginalized communities.

Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen and the state’s attorney general praised the ruling. Pillen highlighted his role in advocating for the bill’s passage.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, many Republican-controlled states have enacted abortion bans. Currently, 14 states have bans at all pregnancy stages, while Nebraska and North Carolina have implemented 12-week bans. Similarly, many GOP-controlled states have restricted gender-affirming care for minors, with 22 states enforcing such measures.

In contrast, several Democratic-controlled states have adopted policies to protect abortion and gender-affirming care access, including efforts to shield healthcare providers from out-of-state investigations.

Nebraska voters may have the final say on abortion access with two potential ballot questions in November: one proposing to add a right to abortion to the state constitution and another to enshrine the 12-week ban in the state constitution.

Read more.

Federal appeals court rules that there is no inherent right to alter one’s sex on a birth certificate.

This blog originally appeared at ABC NEWS.

A federal appeals court panel has ruled that Tennessee does not unconstitutionally discriminate against transgender people by not allowing them to change the sex designation on their birth certificates.

National headlines from ABC News

Catch up on the developing stories making headlines.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A federal appeals court panel ruled 2-1 on Friday that Tennessee does not unconstitutionally discriminate against transgender people by not allowing them to change the sex designation on their birth certificates.

“There is no fundamental right to a birth certificate recording gender identity instead of biological sex,” 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote for the majority in the decision upholding a 2023 district court ruling. The plaintiffs could not show that Tennessee’s policy was created out of animus against transgender people as it has been in place for more than half a century and “long predates medical diagnoses of gender dysphoria,” Sutton wrote.

He noted that “States’ practices are all over the map.” Some allow changes to the birth certificate with medical evidence of surgery. Others require lesser medical evidence. Only 11 states currently allow a change to a birth certificate based solely on a person’s declaration of their gender identity, which is what the plaintiffs are seeking in Tennessee.

Tennessee birth certificates reflect the sex assigned at birth, and that information is used for statistical and epidemiological activities that inform the provision of health services throughout the country, Sutton wrote. “How, it’s worth asking, could a government keep uniform records of any sort if the disparate views of its citizens about shifting norms in society controlled the government’s choices of language and of what information to collect?”

The plaintiffs — four transgender women born in Tennessee — argued in court filings that sex is properly determined not by external genitalia but by gender identity, which they define in their brief as “a person’s core internal sense of their own gender.” The lawsuit, first filed in federal court in Nashville in 2019, claims Tennessee’s prohibition serves no legitimate government interest while it subjects transgender people to discrimination, harassment and even violence when they have to produce a birth certificate for identification that clashes with their gender identity.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Helene White agreed with the plaintiffs, represented by Lambda Legal.

“Forcing a transgender individual to use a birth certificate indicating sex assigned at birth causes others to question whether the individual is indeed the person stated on the birth certificate,” she wrote. “This inconsistency also invites harm and discrimination.”

Lambda Legal did not immediately respond to emails requesting comment on Friday.

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said in a statement that the question of changing the sex designation on a birth certificate should be left to the states.

“While other states have taken different approaches, for decades Tennessee has consistently recognized that a birth certificate records a biological fact of a child being male or female and has never addressed gender identity,” he said.

Read more

Paxton halts Biden’s Title IX rule safeguarding LGBTQ+ students in Texas

This blog originally appeared at KXAN.

Paxton blocks Biden’s Title IX rule protecting LGBTQ+ students in Texas

FILE – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton speaks at a news conference in Dallas on June 22, 2017. Paxton says he’s investigating a key Boeing supplier that is already under scrutiny by federal regulators over the quality of its work on Boeing planes, Friday, March 29, 2024. (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez, File)

AUSTIN (KXAN) — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has blocked the Biden Administration’s Title IX rule aimed at protecting LGBTQ+ students from sex-based discrimination and harassment, according to a Tuesday release from Paxton’s office.

The rule was designed to protect all students and employees from sex discrimination, including providing comprehensive protections against sexual violence and other forms of sex-based harassment.

In the release, Paxton claimed a “major” victory against the Biden Administration’s Department of Education’s attempt to amend Title IX, alleging it would force Texas schools to adopt radical “transgender” policies that violate state and federal law.

“Joe Biden’s unlawful effort to weaponize Title IX for his extremist agenda has been stopped in its tracks,” Paxton stated. “Threatening to withhold education funding by forcing states to accept ‘transgender’ policies that put women in danger was plainly illegal. Texas has prevailed on behalf of the entire Nation.”

The Biden Administration’s changes to Title IX are scheduled to take effect nationwide on Aug. 1, except in states where it has been blocked.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑