Twitter has quietly removed a policy against the “targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals,” raising concerns that the Elon Musk-owned platform is becoming less safe for marginalized groups.
Twitter enacted the policy against deadnaming, or using a transgender person’s name before they transitioned, as well as purposefully using the wrong gender for someone as a form of harassment, in 2018.
On Monday, Twitter also said it will only put warning labels on some tweets that are “potentially” in violation of its rules against hateful conduct. Previously, the tweets were removed.
It was in this policy update that Twitter appears to have deleted the line against deadnaming from its rules.
“Twitter’s decision to covertly roll back its longtime policy is the latest example of just how unsafe the company is for users and advertisers alike,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, the president and CEO of the advocacy group GLAAD. “This decision to roll back LGBTQ safety pulls Twitter even more out of step with TikTok, Pinterest, and Meta, which all maintain similar policies to protect their transgender users at a time when anti-transgender rhetoric online is leading to real world discrimination and violence.”
Twitter did not immediately respond to a message for comment Tuesday.
Missouri’s attorney general announced new restrictions Thursday on gender-affirming care for adults in addition to minors in a move that is believed to be a first nationally and has advocacy groups threatening to sue.
Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced plans to restrict health care for transgender people weeks ago, when protesters rallied at the Capitol to urge lawmakers to pass a law banning puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries for children. But the discussion was focused on minors, not adults.
Missouri Attorney General spokeswoman Madeline Sieren clarified in a statement later in the day that adults also would be covered.
“We have serious concerns about how children are being treated throughout the state, but we believe everyone is entitled to evidence-based medicine and adequate mental health care,” Sieren said.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey speaks outside the Supreme Court on Feb. 28.Patrick Semansky / AP
The rule, which incudes a required 18 months of therapy before receiving gender-affirming health care, is set to take effect April 27 and expire next February.
The ACLU and Lambda Legal said in a joint statement that they would “take any necessary legal action” and urged those affected to call.
“The Attorney General’s so-called emergency rule is based on distorted, misleading, and debunked claims and ignores the overwhelming body of scientific and medical evidence supporting this care,” the statement said.
Robert Fischer, the spokesman for the LGBTQ rights groups PROMO, said he was not aware of similar restrictions elsewhere.
“He’s essentially attacking the entire trans community at this point,” Fischer said of Bailey. “It’s no longer just about children.”
The National Center for Transgender Equality called the order “deeply wrong” in a tweet, adding that “trans people of all ages across the state of Missouri deserve access to health care.”
The restrictions are in response to a former employee’s allegations of mistreatment at a transgender youth clinic in St. Louis run by Washington University. Bailey is investigating the center.
“My office is stepping up to protect children throughout the state while we investigate the allegations and how they are harming children,” Bailey said in a statement.
University spokespeople didn’t immediately respond to phone or email messages from The Associated Press seeking comment.
Moving forward, doctors who provide gender-affirming health care must first provide them a lengthy list of potential negative side effects and information warning against those treatments, according to a copy of the rule released Thursday.
Health care providers will need to ensure “any psychiatric symptoms from existing mental health comorbidities of the patient have been treated and resolved” before providing gender-affirming treatments under the new rule. Physicians also must screen patients for social media addiction, autism and signs of “social contagion with respect to the patient’s gender identity.”
The FDA approved puberty blockers 30 years ago to treat children with precocious puberty — a condition that causes sexual development to begin much earlier than usual. Sex hormones — synthetic forms of estrogen and testosterone — were approved decades ago to treat hormone disorders or as birth control pills.
The FDA has not approved the medications specifically to treat gender-questioning youth, but they have been used for many years for that purpose “off label,” a common and accepted practice for many medical conditions. Doctors who treat transgender patients say those decades of use are proof the treatments are not experimental.
Critics have raise concerns about children changing their minds. Yet the evidence suggests detransitioning is not as common as opponents of transgender medical treatment for youth contend, though few studies exist and they have their weaknesses.
Bailey’s rule was released the same day Missouri’s Republican-led House voted to ban access to transgender-related health care for minors.
The House voted 103-52 along mostly party lines in favor of the ban, although the bill’s passage seems uncertain in the Senate.
The House proposal is stricter than what was passed by the GOP-led Senate, where Democrats have more influence through the use of stall tactics.
Senators compromised to exempt care for minors whose treatment is already underway. The Senate bill also would expire after four years.
The House version includes no exceptions for current treatments and would remain in effect indefinitely.
Republican Senate leaders said it’s unlikely that the House version will make it through the Senate.
“We’ve already passed legislation on this issue out of the Senate,” Senate President Pro Tem Caleb Rowden said. “We would expect the House to appreciate how hard and difficult it was and to take up our bill and pass it.”
Both the House and Senate proposals would ban inmates and prisoners from accessing gender-affirming surgeries and would end coverage of any gender-affirming treatments for Missouri patients on Medicaid, the federal health insurance program.
The Human Rights Campaign condemned the legislation in a statement, describing gender-affirming care as medically necessary.
At least 13 states have now enacted laws restricting or banning gender-affirming care for minors: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Utah, South Dakota and West Virginia. Bills are awaiting action from governors in Kansas, Montana and North Dakota. Federal judges have blocked enforcement of laws in Alabama and Arkansas, and nearly two dozen states are considering bills this year to restrict or ban care.
House debate on the bill became emotional as some Democrats argued the ban on health care will hurt transgender children.
“You are erasing my grandchild,” said St. Louis Democratic Rep. Barbara Phifer, whose grandson is transgender.
Republican sponsor Rep. Brad Hudson, of Cape Fair, criticized Democrats for threatening to end political partnerships and friendships with Republicans over the bill.
Hudson said his bill “seeks to protect kids” and that it’s unfair that Democrats are describing it as hateful towards transgender children.
“A yes vote is a vote to protect kids from sex-change drugs and surgeries,” Hudson said.
The first openly gay person to lead the American Medical Association takes the reins at a fractious time for U.S. health care.
Transgender patients and those seeking abortion care face restrictions in many places. The medical judgment of physicians is being overridden by state laws. Disinformation is rampant. And the nation isn’t finished with Covid-19.
In the two decades since Dr. Jesse Ehrenfeld first got involved with the AMA as young medical resident, the nation’s largest physicians’ group has tried to shed its image as a conservative self-interested trade association. While physician pocketbook issues remain a big focus, the AMA is also a powerful lobbying force for a range of public health issues.
Two years ago, the AMA won widespread praise for announcing a plan to dismantle structural racism within its ranks and the U.S. medical establishment. It has adopted policies that stress health equity and inclusiveness — moves that inspired critics to accuse it of “wokeness.”
At 44, Ehrenfeld will be among the AMA’s youngest presidents when he begins his one-year term on June 13. An anesthesiologist, Navy combat veteran and father of two young children, he spoke recently to The Associated Press about his background and new job.
The conversation has been edited for clarity and length.
Q. Why is your being part of the LGBTQ community a big deal at this moment and how will it inform your role as AMA president?
A: I didn’t run as a gay man. That’s not my platform, but it’s a part of my identity. And people know that.
Representation and visibility is so important. I can’t tell you the number of emails, letters, phone calls, text messages that I got when I was elected into this role from people around the world that saw this as an important moment, an important recognition of what inclusivity and equality can be to help advance health equity for everyone.
Q: How will your experience as part of the LGBTQ community inform and influence your new role?
A: I’ve experienced the health care system as a gay person, as a gay parent, as in many ways wonderful positive experiences and other ways, some deeply harmful experiences. And I know that we can do better as a nation. We can do better as a system that can lift up health. And I expect that there’ll be opportunities to shine a light on that during my year as president.
Q: What are examples of those experiences?
A: There’s so many times where our health care system just does not accommodate people who aren’t in the majority. As a gay parent and a gay dad, I can’t tell you how many forms I filled out where there’s a place for the mom and a place for the dad. It’s a small thing. But it’s a signal that we’re different and maybe we’re not welcome or accepted.
When you have those small, subtle irritations that add up day after day after day, whether you’re an LGBT person or from a minority group, that causes stress. These friction points … are so pronounced for so many who are in underserved communities, so many in the LGBT community, and particularly for transgender individuals. And I know we can do better.
I’ve been fortunate to have two beautiful boys brought into this world with the support of an incredible group of physicians. But there were definitely lots of moments along the way where it was clear that we were a little bit different than everybody else in a way that didn’t need to be.
Q: This seems like an unprecedented time for political interference in medicine.
A: I’m deeply concerned about government intrusion into decision-making for patients. The Supreme Court ruling around abortion has had profound implications for reproductive rights. And fundamentally, patients have a right to access evidence-based health care services. That includes comprehensive reproductive health care. It includes care for transgender people.
States that ban abortion, that ban health care for transgender youth are placing the government right into the patient-physician relationship. And we know that this leads to devastating health consequences and can jeopardize lives. The AMA continues to speak out against these kinds of actions.
Q: What power does the AMA really have to protect those rights?
A: I don’t think we’re powerless at all. The AMA was deeply involved in helping the Biden Administration put out guidance to help physicians and patients understand that you don’t have to disclose private medical information to third parties. And we’ll continue to call for things like unrestricted access to (the abortion drug) mifepristone.
Q: Are you discouraged by the number of states that seem to be jumping on this bandwagon?
A: I’m an optimist. There are particular political divisions that are different right now. The attack on science, the attack on following the evidence to deliver care is new. Globally, it has accelerated during the pandemic, but the rampant misinformation, disinformation — all of those challenges are things I know we can overcome. It requires the AMA to lift up our voices and to not give up.
Q: Will addressing the nation’s mental health crisis be part of your role?
A: We need Congress to take action. There have been 15 years now of repeated failures by health care companies to comply with what was a landmark law in 2008 around mental health parity and substance use disorder.
That law passed by Congress has never been enforced. Those violations continue to be more serious than they were a decade ago.
It affects patients with autism. It affects patients with eating disorders, substance use disorders. It delays care. It’s harming patients.
And we are likely causing deaths to happen that are avoidable. We know that there are federal actions that could be taken to help with this, including enabling patients to recover losses associated with an improper denial of care.
The other aspect around mental health access that is really important is permanently expanding access to telehealth.
Q: Critics have long said the AMA is primarily a self-interested trade group. How is that a misconception?
A: We have a pretty simple message, and it’s to elevate the art and science of medicine for the betterment of human health. And that’s why we care about things like climate change and things like health equity.
We have to make sure that there is joy in the practice of medicine. We have to make sure that our health care systems reward and support and allow practices to thrive.
And you look at boneheaded decisions like the fact that physicians got a 2% pay cut from Medicare this past January as opposed to an inflation update. Those are things that are important. They’re financial.
But without advocacy in those realms, practices will close. Medicare patients won’t have a doctor to see. And we just we can’t allow that to happen.
Sports leagues and teams often use Pride nights to raise the visibility and acceptance of LGBTQ people — as well as sell them tickets — and the NHL has been a leader. They can include special jerseys designed by LGBTQ artists, performances, information tables, even drag performances. And they’re largely a hit.
But six NHL players recently opted out of wearing rainbow-colored jerseys on their teams’ Pride nights for the first time, leading the league’s commissioner to say it is weighing the future of the events.
That worries some fans and LGBTQ supporters, who say it’s a sign that a political climate that has led to restrictions on expression, health care and transgender sports participation both in the U.S. and internationally is now threatening events that are meant to be fun and affirming.
“It’s definitely fair to say that this political landscape is helping to sort of normalize people for opting out of the optional ways that they have been asked to show support for marginalized members of society,” said Hudson Taylor, executive director and founder of Athlete Ally, an organization that works with teams and leagues to push for LGBTQ inclusivity.
Pro sports has been here before. In June, five pitchers with the Tampa Bay Rays cited their Christian faith in refusing to wear Pride jerseys, and a U.S. women’s national soccer player skipped an overseas trip in 2017 when the team wore Pride jerseys and also didn’t play in an NWSL game last year for the same reason.
This season, three NHL teams — the Chicago Blackhawks, the New York Rangers and the Minnesota Wild — that previously wore rainbow warmups decided not to. The Rangers and Wild changed course after initially planning for players to wear rainbow-themed warmup jerseys but did not specifically say why.
Between the players opting out and the team decisions, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said the league will “evaluate” in the offseason how it handles Pride nights moving forward, calling the refusals a distraction from “the substance of our what our teams and we have been doing and stand for.” Yet he also noted that the NHL, teams and players “overwhelmingly” support Pride nights.
The NHL has partnered for a decade with You Can Play Project, which advocates for LGBTQ participation in sports. No NHL players had previously opted out of Pride nights.
Internationally, a Russian law that restricts “propaganda” about LGBTQ people, including in advertising, media and the arts, has led at least one Russian NHL player to decline participation in Pride night. And Ugandan lawmakers recently passed a bill prescribing jail terms for offenses related to same-sex relations.
It’s all connected, said Evan Brody, an assistant professor at the University of Kentucky whose media studies research often focuses on LGBTQ spaces in sports.
“The laws that are being passed, the players not participating, all exist within the same kind of ecosphere,” Brody said. “They all exist within this larger anti-LGBTQ discourse, which I think we are often very quick to point out about other countries and maybe less so to think about how that’s affecting things in the United States.”
In the NHL, many Pride nights are more about selling tickets, Taylor said. But because the league has been such a leader among men’s sports in how to do Pride nights well, he said, it’s “conspicuous” to see players and teams “roll back the ways in which they have historically shown support for and given visibility to the LGBTQ community.”
Buffalo Sabres Victor Olofsson, left, Jack Quinn and JJ Peterka wear special warmup jerseys commemorating Pride Night before a game against the Montreal Canadiens in Buffalo, N.Y., on March 27, 2023. Adrian Kraus / AP
Russian Ivan Provorov and Canadians James Reimer and brothers Eric and Marc Staal all cited religious beliefs for refusing to take part in warmups in rainbow-colored jerseys. Ilya Lyubushkin said he would not participate because of the law in Russia, where he was born. And Andrei Kuzmenko, another Russian player, decided not to wear the special uniform after discussions with his family.
“Some players choose to make choices that they are free to make,” Bettman said Thursday night at a news conference in Seattle. “That doesn’t mean they don’t respect other people and their beliefs and their lifestyles and who they are. It just means they don’t want to endorse it by wearing uniforms that they are not comfortable wearing.”
Taylor noted that the fear of Russian retribution could be “very real” for a player like Lyubushkin, who has family in Moscow and visits often.
“I don’t think the LGBTQ community should feel that NHL hockey players are turning their back on that community,” new NHL Players’ Association executive director Marty Walsh said. “A supermajority of players have worn the jersey.”
The Twin Cities Queer Hockey Association took part in the Minnesota Wild’s Pride night this season, with two teenage LGBTQ+ members of the association sitting on the bench during warmups, among other things.
Bennett-Danek, who cofounded the association with her wife in early 2022, said the Wild have “been nothing but supportive” of their organization and the community at large.
“Yes, canceling wearing the jerseys was wrong, but they did not cancel any other part of Pride night and they continue to support our group, even today,” Bennett-Danek said. “They are also handing over the Pride jerseys with signatures for auction to further help support our LGBTQIA community here in the Twin Cities. … So, in our mind they have righted the wrong. They have promised us that Pride next year will not be canceled.”
The NHL hasn’t given out a penalty or fine for anti-LGBTQ language since 2017, though the American Hockey League suspended a player in April 2022 for eight games for using homophobic language. And the vast majority of NHL players are participating in pregame Pride skates, which Edmonton’s Zach Hyman said is “an obvious no-brainer.”
“It doesn’t go against any of my beliefs,” Hyman said. “On the contrary, I think it’s extremely important to be open and welcoming to that greater community just because they’re a minority and they’ve faced a lot of persecution over the years. And to show that we care and that we’re willing and ready to include them in our game and our sport is extremely important to me.”
Kentucky’s Democratic governor issued an election-year veto Friday of a sweeping Republican bill aimed at regulating the lives of transgender youths that includes banning access to gender-affirming health care and restricting the bathrooms they can use.
The bill also bans discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools and allows teachers to refuse to refer to transgender students by the pronouns they use. It easily passed the GOP-dominated legislature with veto-proof margins, and lawmakers will reconvene next week for the final two days of this year’s session, when they could vote to override the veto.
Gov. Andy Beshear said in a written veto message that the bill allows “too much government interference in personal healthcare issues and rips away the freedom of parents to make medical decisions for their children.”
In his one-page message, he warned that the bill’s repercussions would include an increase in youth suicides. The governor said, “My faith teaches me that all children are children of God and Senate Bill 150 will endanger the children of Kentucky.”
Beshear told reporters later Friday that transgender children and their parents were among the Kentuckians who contacted his office as he reviewed the legislation.
“I heard from children that believe this bill is picking on them, and asking — in many ways — why?” the governor said. “I told them that I was going to show them that there is at least one person in Frankfort that cares for all of our children in the commonwealth, no matter what.”
Beshear’s veto comes as he seeks re-election to a second term this year in Republican-trending Kentucky, and his veto could reverberate through the November election.
Republicans quickly pounced on the governor’s veto to try to portray him as out of touch with most Kentuckians on the culture wars issue.
“Andy Beshear thinks it’s okay for children to have access to life-altering sex change surgery and drugs before they turn 18,” state Republican Party spokesperson Sean Southard said in a statement. “Today, he revealed how radical he truly is.”
The legislation in Kentucky is part of a national movement, with state lawmakers approving extensive measures that restrict the rights of LGBTQ+ people this year, from bills targeting trans athletes and drag performers to measures limiting gender-affirming care.
In Kentucky, the expanded version that reached Beshear’s desk was rushed through both legislative chambers in a matter of hours on March 16 before lawmakers began an extended break. The fast-track work enabled lawmakers to retain their ability to override the governor’s veto. The action triggered outrage and tears among opponents unable to stop the legislation.
The bill’s supporters say they are trying to protect children from undertaking gender-affirming treatments that they might regret as adults. Research shows such regret is rare.
The repackaged measure would ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. It would outlaw gender reassignment surgery for anyone under 18, as well as the use of puberty blockers and hormones, and inpatient and outpatient gender-affirming hospital services.
Doctors would have to set a timeline to “detransition” children already taking puberty blockers or undergoing hormone therapy. They could continue offering care as they taper a minor’s treatments, if removing them from the treatment immediately could harm the child.
“The American Medical Association reports that receipt of care dramatically reduces the rates of suicide attempts, decreases feelings of depression and anxiety and reduces substance abuse,” Beshear said in his veto message.
The bill would not allow schools to discuss sexual orientation or gender identity with students of any age.
Another key provision would require school districts to devise bathroom policies that, “at a minimum,” would not allow transgender children to use the bathroom aligned with their gender identities.
It also would allow teachers to refuse to refer to transgender students by the pronouns they use and would require schools to notify parents when lessons related to human sexuality are going to be taught.
Beshear said in his veto message that the bill would turn educators and administrators into “investigators that must listen in on student conversations and then knock on doors to confront and question parents and families about how students behave and/or refer to themselves or others.”
David Walls, executive director of The Family Foundation, condemned the veto, saying the bill seeks to protect children and their parents from “radical, politicized ideologies.” He said the bill would result in “setting policy in alignment with the truth that every child is created as a biological male or female and deserves to be loved, treated with dignity, and accepted for who they really are.”
After the bill passed the legislature, the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky warned that it “stands ready” to challenge the measure in court if it becomes law.
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday signed a law prohibiting transgender people at public schools from using the restroom that matches their gender identity, the first of several states expected to enact such bans this year amid a flood of bills nationwide targeting the trans community.
The bill signed by the Republican governor makes Arkansas the fourth state to place such restrictions at public schools, and it comes as bills in Idaho and Iowa also await their governor’s signature. And it might be followed by an even stricter Arkansas bill criminalizing transgender adults using public restrooms that match their gender identity.
Arkansas’ law, which won’t take effect until later this summer, applies to multi-person restrooms and locker rooms at public schools and charter schools serving prekindergarten through 12th grade. The majority-Republican Legislature gave final approval to the bill last week.
“The Governor has said she will sign laws that focus on protecting and educating our kids, not indoctrinating them and believes our schools are no place for the radical left’s woke agenda,” Alexa Henning, Sanders’ spokesperson, said in a statement. “Arkansas isn’t going to rewrite the rules of biology just to please a handful of far-left advocates.”
Similar laws have been enacted in Alabama, Oklahoma and Tennessee, although lawsuits have been filed challenging the Oklahoma and Tennessee restrictions.
Proposals to restrict transgender people using the restroom of their choice have seen a resurgence this year, six years after North Carolina repealed its bathroom law in the wake of widespread protests and boycotts. More than two dozen bathroom bills have been filed in 17 states, according to the Human Rights Campaign.
“They’re singling out transgender people for no other reason than dislike, disapproval and misunderstanding of who transgender youth are,” said Paul Castillo, senior counsel and students’ rights strategist for Lambda Legal. “And the entire school population suffers as a result of these types of bills, particularly schools and teachers and administrators who are dealing with real problems and need to focus on creating a welcome environment for every student.”
The proposals are among a record number of bills filed to restrict the rights of transgender people by limiting or banning gender-affirming care for minors, banning transgender girls from school sports and restricting drag shows. Transgender people have also faced increasingly hostile rhetoric at statehouses.
Another bill pending in Arkansas goes even further than the North Carolina law by imposing criminal penalties. That proposal would allow someone to be charged with misdemeanor sexual indecency with a child if they use a public restroom or changing room of the opposite sex when a minor is present.
“It’s a flagrant message from them that they refuse to respect (transgender people’s) rights and humanity, to respect Arkansans’ rights and humanity,” said Holly Dickson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas.
The new Arkansas law requires schools to provide reasonable accommodations, including single-person restrooms. Superintendents, principals and teachers who violate the prohibition could face fines of at least $1,000 from a state panel, and parents could also file private lawsuits to enforce the measure.
“Each child in our schools has a right to privacy and to feel safe and to feel comfortable in the bathroom they need to go to,” Republican Rep. Mary Bentley, the bill’s sponsor, told lawmakers earlier this year.
But Clayton Crockett, the father of a transgender child, described to lawmakers earlier this year how a similar policy adopted at his daughter’s school made her feel further marginalized.
“She feels targeted, she feels discriminated against, she feels bullied, she feels singled out,” Crockett said at a House panel hearing on the bill in January.
Opponents have also complained the legislation doesn’t provide funding for schools that may need to build single-person restrooms to provide reasonable accommodations.
At least two federal appeals courts have upheld transgender students’ rights to use the bathroom corresponding with their gender identity. Supporters of the bill, however, have cited a federal appeals court ruling upholding a similar policy at a Florida school district last year.
The Arkansas measure won’t take effect until 90 days after the Legislature adjourns this year’s session, which isn’t expected to happen until next month at the earliest.
Sanders signed the bill a week after she approved legislation making it easier to sue providers of gender-affirming care to minors. That law, which also doesn’t take effect until this summer, is an effort to effectively reinstate a ban on such care for minors that’s been blocked by a federal judge.
Sanders earlier this month also signed a wide-ranging education bill that prohibits classroom instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation before 5th grade. The restriction is similar to a Florida measure that critics have called the “Don’t Say Gay” law.
Sanders on Monday signed the new law, which won’t take effect until this summer. It would allow anyone who received gender-affirming care as a minor to file a malpractice lawsuit against their doctor for up to 15 years after they turn 18. Under current Arkansas law, medical malpractice claims must be filed within two years of an injury.
Legal experts have said the change could close access to gender-affirming care for children by making it nearly impossible for providers to get malpractice insurance.
“Arkansas infamously passed the first law in the nation to try to ban gender affirming care for trans youth and after hearing extensive evidence, the courts have blocked that ban,” Holly Dickson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, said in a statement. “This bill is an effort to achieve indirectly what the Constitution prohibits the state from doing directly.”
The new law is among a growing number of bills targeting transgender people, who have faced increasingly hostile rhetoric at statehouses. At least 175 bills targeting trans people have been introduced in statehouses so far this year, the most in a single year, according to the Human Rights Campaign.
The bill was signed as a federal judge is considering whether to strike down a 2021 Arkansas law that would prohibit doctors from providing gender-affirming hormone therapy or puberty blockers to anyone under 18 — or referring them to other doctors who can provide that care. No gender-affirming surgery is performed on minors in the state.
Republican Sen. Gary Stubblefield, who sponsored the malpractice law, said he didn’t know if the measure would face a similar court challenge.
“Anything can create a court challenge in the world we live in today,” Stubblefield said. “I know we did what we thought was best for our children.”
U.S. District Judge Jay Moody temporarily blocked the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors in 2021. Arkansas was the first state to enact such a ban, and several states have approved similar restrictions. A ban in Alabama has also been blocked by a federal judge.
Opponents of such treatments argue that minors are too young to make decisions about their futures. But every major medical group, including the American Medical Association, supports gender-affirming care for youths and has opposed the bans.
The malpractice legislation includes a “safe harbor” provision that would give doctors a defense against malpractice lawsuits over providing gender-affirming care for children, but only if they follow restrictions that experts have said are inconsistent with the standard of care for the treatments.
The new law won’t take effect until 90 days after the Legislature adjourns this year’s session, which isn’t expected to happen until next month at the earliest.
The bill is among several targeting transgender youth that have been proposed in Arkansas this year.
Others include legislation that would criminalize transgender adults using the bathroom that corresponds with their gender identity. The bill goes even further than a bathroom bill North Carolina repealed following widespread boycotts.
Dickson urged Sanders to hear from trans youth and those who care from them before signing any more bills affecting the LGBTQ community.
A Vermont religious school that withdrew its girls’ basketball team from a playoff game because a transgender student was playing on the opposing team won’t be able to participate in future tournaments, the Vermont Principals’ Association announced Monday.
Mid Vermont Christian School, in White River Junction, forfeited the Feb. 21 game, saying that it believed that the transgender player “jeopardizes the fairness of the game and the safety of our players.”
Mid Vermont Christian School.Google Maps
The executive council of the principals’ association, which is the governing body for Vermont school sports and activities for member schools, ruled that the school had violated policies and is ineligible to participate in future tournaments that it sanctions. The move applies to all sports.
“The VPA again reiterates its ongoing support of transgender student-athletes as not only a part of building an inclusive community for each student to grow and thrive, but also as a clear expectation by Vermont state law(s) in the Agency of Education Best Practices, and in VPA Policy regarding transgender student athletes,” the association said in a statement.
It sent a letter to the school saying that Mid Vermont did not meet the association’s policies on race, gender and disability awareness.
The school did not respond to an email requesting comment.
Former Vice President Mike Pence is stepping up his outreach in Iowa ahead of a possible 2024 presidential campaign by rallying conservatives against transgender-affirming policies in schools, like one adopted in an eastern Iowa district last year.
The effort by Advancing American Freedom, a group formed by Pence in 2021 and financed by his supporters, will include digital ads, rallies, canvassing and perhaps radio and television spots. It comes as a federal court in Minnesota is scheduled next week to hear a case brought by a group representing parents of students in Linn-Mar Community School District outside Cedar Rapids.
“The strength of our nation is tied to the strength of our families, and we cannot stand idly by as the radical left attempts to indoctrinate our children behind parents’ backs,” Pence said in a statement provided to The Associated Press. “Advancing American Freedom will not rest until parental rights are restored in Iowa and across the nation.”
The Linn-Mar board last year adopted a policy allowing students to request a gender support plan to begin socially transitioning at school and without the permission of their parents. The group representing the parents is suing to overturn the policy.
The planned budget for the effort is more than $1 million, and the push is expected to last several months, said a Pence aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of a formal announcement later Thursday.
The moves by the outside group — separate from any potential Pence candidacy — comes as school policy, notably involving gender identification and sexual orientation, has become an early focus of 2024 Republican presidential prospects.
The issue is particularly relevant in Iowa, given both the court case and the Republican-controlled Legislature advancing legislation barring schools from supporting a student’s social change in gender identity.
California, a U.S. trendsetter for progressive policies and a state where the current governor once made news issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in San Francisco before it was legal, will attempt to enshrine marriage equality in the state constitution.
The effort comes 15 years after a voter-approved initiative, called Proposition 8, banned the state from recognizing same-sex marriages. In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for same-sex marriage in California. The constitutional amendment is still on the books, however, and that worries advocates who think the high court may revisit the 2015 case that legalized gay marriage nationwide.
“It’s absolute poison, it is so destructive and it’s humiliating that this is in our constitution,” said Democrat Scott Wiener, a state senator who represents San Francisco.
He and Democratic Assembly Member Evan Low of Silicon Valley plan to introduce legislation Tuesday to rescind Proposition 8. The measure would need to be approved in the Legislature by a two-thirds vote, and then it will ultimately fall to voters to decide via a referendum.
In the days leading up to Proposition 8′s approval, Low joined opponents of the measure outside his alma mater De Anza College in Cupertino, California, to call on voters to reject the initiative. When it passed, it felt personal to Low, who is gay.
“Why do fellow Californians hate me?” he said. “Why do they feel that my rights should be eliminated?”
California could follow in the footsteps of Nevada, which in 2020 became the first state to amend its constitution to ensure the right to same-sex marriage. The matter took on fresh urgency last year when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the right to an abortion established by Roe v. Wade. At the time, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called into question other prominent cases and urged the court to reconsider them. His list included Obergefell v. Hodges, which forced states to issue and recognize same-sex marriages.
“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote, referencing two other landmark cases involving access to birth control and a decision striking down laws against same-sex sexual activity.
In December, President Joe Biden signed into law the Respect for Marriage Act, which requires states to recognize same-sex marriages, but the legislation doesn’t force states to allow them if Obergefell is overturned.
Wiener and Low, the two California lawmakers, hope to replicate the process under which state voters in November approved a constitutional change guaranteeing the right to abortion.
Proposition 8 has yet to be repealed because there was less urgency to do so after the state was allowed to resume issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples and gay marriage was legalized nationwide, Wiener said.
“It became a fire drill once the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade,” he said.
The path to marriage equality in the Golden State was uneven. In 2000, voters approved a statute that banned the recognition of same-sex marriages, a measure that was overturned by the courts. Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who became San Francisco’s mayor in 2004, issued marriages in the city to same-sex couples in a move that defied the law and ran counter to views then held by many in his party. In 2005, the California Legislature was ahead of all other states when it passed a bill to legalize same-sex marriage. But then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, vetoed it.
Support for marriage equality has rapidly expanded since the Obergefell ruling. While Mormon groups helped fund the Proposition 8 campaign in California, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints came out in support of the Respect for Marriage Act.
Tony Hoang, executive director of Equality California, is optimistic the group can help build a large supportive coalition for the proposed amendment.
“I know this will be a bipartisan campaign,” he said.
