Tag: gender

Judge blocks sanctions on boys who objected to female in locker room, rejects district’s Hail Mary

Awealthy suburban D.C. school district belatedly justified its 10-day suspensions of two boys for complaining about a female who identifies as a boy recording them in their locker room, by claiming they had harassed the female student “over weeks and months.”

That wasn’t enough for U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema to reinstate suspensions by Virginia’s Loudoun County Public Schools, which she paused Sept. 16 shortly after the anonymous Christian boys sued.

The President Clinton nominee granted the boys’ preliminary injunction motion at a hearing Friday, shielding the 11th graders throughout litigation from punishment and a disciplinary notation on their record that could sink their college applications. 

One left LCPS after suing but “the threat of discipline remains” if he returns, their lawyers at America First Legal Foundation and Founding Freedoms Law Center wrote in their motion for preliminary injunction. (Brinkema asked last month why he should remain a plaintiff.)

Brinkema didn’t give her reasoning in Friday’s bench order, but AFL lawyer Ian Prior told the media she cited serious constitutional questions, the harm of removing their educational experience and the timing of the “permanent mark on their records.” The judge will issue an order with her reasoning but didn’t give herself a deadline.

“We’re extremely pleased” suspensions are off the table throughout litigation, Prior said. They expect to succeed on all counts – likelihood of success is a factor supporting preliminary injunctions – but need to win only one, he stressed. 

It’s arguing discrimination by religion, because a Muslim student who complained about the female wasn’t punished, and sex, for LCPS telling the boys to find a different place to change but not the female student. LCPS also violated the boys’ constitutionally protected free speech and misused its Title IX probe and findings “as a pretext for viewpoint discrimination.”

Keep reading

SCOTUS To Decide If Free Speech Applies To Biology-Affirming Therapists And Their Clients

n Oct. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar. This is the latest in a seemingly unending series of cases from Colorado that my colleagues at Alliance Defending Freedom have argued. The cases stem from the state’s apparent aversion to the First Amendment.

Not content with their failed attempts to coerce speech from artists like Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop or Lorie Smith of 303 Creative, and not deterred by clear rebukes from the Supreme Court in those cases, the state of Colorado has set its sights on professional counselors.

The law in question bans specific, voluntary counseling conversations, silences the viewpoint disfavored by the government, and leaves struggling youth and their parents with only one government-approved option. Colorado’s law bans counselors like Kaley Chiles from helping minors realign their thoughts and feelings with their biological sex — even when that is the young person’s goal for counseling.

Counseling that affirms so-called “gender transition” is fine by Colorado. Counseling that affirms biological reality is fined by Colorado, up to $5,000 per offense, and could include the loss of licensure.

This is not just an esoteric debate for law school faculty lounges; children’s health and well-being are at stake. Colorado’s defense of this blatant viewpoint discrimination and government censorship hinges on the contention, without a hint of irony, that the state is regulating conduct, not speech. How do Kaley Chiles and her clients engage in the “conduct” of talk therapy without it being speech? Perhaps a high-stakes game of charades? The notion would be laughable if the consequences were not so serious.

If government places an authoritarian thumb on the scale, allowing only one viewpoint, invading the vulnerable space between counselor and client, and dictating one outcome, the victims are children and their families. If the Supreme Court does not protect the speech of counselors like Kaley Chiles and her clients, children in Colorado and more than 20 other states with similar censorship laws will be trapped on a one-way journey to the perils of “gender transition.”

The eventual destination is one of irreversible physical damage, potential sterilization, and a lifetime of being a patient. Our nation’s struggling youth deserve compassionate counseling directed by their goals with assistance from loving parents and professionals, not a government-sponsored pathway to chemicals and surgeries that can leave permanent mental and physical scars.

Adding rhetorical insult to injury is the fact that under Colorado’s law, counseling clients to align their feelings with their biology is deemed “conversion therapy,” while counseling a client to transition from his or her sex to the opposite sex is “gender affirming care.” The assault on common sense and the English language may pale in comparison to the harm suffered by Chiles and her clients, but the First Amendment protects speech because words matter, truth matters, and any attempt by government to silence citizens matters.

Keep reading

How Trans-Activists Hatched A Plot In The 1980s To Hijack ‘Science’

The latest headlines that have thrust transgender violence and left-wing radicalism into the news cycle:

Hmm. 

Well, not the legacy media’s news cycle (if that’s MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, NPR, etc.), they’re still fixated on “misinformation” and “disinformation” campaigns in their effort to bring down President Trump and crush the MAGA movement for their globalist friends. But the American people no longer believe their nonsense and have rejected the globalists. 

On Wednesday, the New York Post Editorial Board penned in a title: “How many high-profile trans killers can the media ignore?”

But let’s take a step back several decades to understand how the radical left and its woke trans-activist movement managed to hijack science within gender medicine – to grasp better how we ended up in a world experiencing both a surge of kids identifying as transgender and, as noted above, a rising trend in trans-related violence.

Plus, if you’ve noticed, the radical left’s woke army is comprised of …   

Mia Hughes, a Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and director of the advocacy group Genspect Canada, spoke at a closed-door Genspect event in late September titled “The Bigger Picture Conference” in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

In her speech, Hughes described how woke ideology hijacked science within gender medicine by infiltrating psychiatry, endocrinology, and surgery, reshaping modern medicine as we know it. She warned of the dangers of mistaking ideology for evidence (or “science”) and urged a return to compassion, scientific clarity, and the courage to confront uncomfortable truths.

Here’s what she told the audience: 

Back in the 1980s, a small group of trans activists hatched a plot: to take an absurd, illogical overvalued belief—that being transgender is innate, natural, healthy—and force all of society to live in a fictional world built on it.

Given the sheer audacity of that plot, there must have been people who said it couldn’t be done. But if such voices existed, they were ignored. And the activists pressed on until they succeeded in nothing less than reshaping reality itself.

And they didn’t just persuade people to politely look the other way.

They rallied good, decent people to march in the streets demanding that teenagers sacrifice their health, their fertility, and their sexual function in the name of this belief.

They convinced governments to write laws based on a non-existent, fictional concept.

They enlisted well-meaning teachers to poison the minds of a generation with absurd lies.

And they drove doctors to amputate healthy organs and call it medicine.

If they could succeed in creating that false reality, then surely we can succeed in restoring truth.

Because our cause is not built on lies but on logic and reason. Not on ideology but on sound ethical principles. Not on harm but on healing.

Keep reading

‘Blatant Viewpoint Discrimination’: Alito Slams Colorado For Telling Therapists They Can’t Affirm Kids’ Natural Sex

Associate Justice Samuel Alito exposed the absurdity of a Colorado law prohibiting so-called “conversion therapy” for minors during a high-profile case before the Supreme Court on Tuesday.

The moment came during oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case focused on a legal challenge brought by Colorado resident Kaley Chiles. A licensed therapist who provides counseling to children struggling with issues related to sexual orientation and gender dysphoria, Chiles alleges that the Centennial State’s “conversion therapy” law infringes upon her First Amendment right to free speech by inhibiting the types of discussions she has with her minor clients.

When questioning Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson, Alito posed a pair of hypothetical scenarios undermining the state’s argument that the statute does not engage in “viewpoint discrimination.” Alito’s questioning exposed the state’s policy of permitting therapists to encourage a child’s homosexual- or transgenderism-related behaviors, while at the same time prohibiting therapists from offering counseling that could help a child overcome them.

“So in the first situation, an adolescent male comes to a licensed therapist and says he’s attracted to other males, but he feels uneasy and guilty with those feelings. He wants to end or lessen them, and he asks for the therapist’s help in doing so,” Alito said. “The other situation is a similar adolescent male comes to a licensed therapist, says he’s attracted to other males, feels uneasy and guilty about those feelings, and he wants the therapist’s help so he will feel comfortable as a gay young man.”

The Bush appointee went on to argue that Colorado’s interpretation of the statute “dictates opposite results in those two situations … based on the viewpoint expressed.” “One viewpoint,” he noted, “is the viewpoint that a minor should be able to obtain talk therapy to overcome same-sex attraction, if that’s what … he or she wants,” while “the other is the viewpoint that the minor should not be able to obtain talk therapy to overcome same-sex attraction, even if that is what he or she wants.”

This “[l]ooks like blatant viewpoint discrimination,” Alito said.

In response, Stevenson claimed that both examples would “be permissible” under Colorado’s law “because it didn’t sound like in either case the goal was to actually change sexual orientation.”

“And again, that’s the touchstone because that’s where the harms come from,” Stevenson said.

Keep reading

California Governor Vetoes Bill Mandating New Health Curriculum for Elementary and Middle Schools

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vetoed a bill that would have directed the State Board of Education to approve new teaching for health classes in elementary and middle schools.

The bill, sponsored by Assemblywoman Tasha Boerner, a Democrat who represents Encinitas, California, sought to compel the State Board of Education to finalize health education resources by mid-2028. These materials were to follow the guidelines set in a 2019 statewide plan for health instruction.

In explaining his choice, Newsom said the bill should be considered only after finishing an ongoing evaluation of health teaching programs across California. This study aims to assess current practices and identify potential improvements before mandating new tools.

According to opponents of the measure, implementing the bill could lead to introducing lessons as early as third grade that teach children that reproductive organs do not always align with an individual’s sense of gender.

“Teaching controversial gender theories to students as young as eight or nine years old is not a practice that most Californians support, nor want to see happening in our schools,” state Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones, a Republican from Santee, wrote in a Sept. 26 letter to the governor, urging him to veto the bill.

Jones, in his letter, wrote that the 2019 health framework “introduces the theory that reproductive anatomy does not necessarily determine a person’s gender.”

Keep reading

Here Are All The Transgender Medical Experiments Your Tax Dollars Are Funding Through Obamacare

In a social media post last week, President Trump noted that what Democrats are demanding in exchange for their cooperation in reopening government would require more than $1 trillion in spending and “force Taxpayers to fund Transgender surgery for minors.” Indeed, taxpayers are already funding such surgeries via Obamacare subsidies — and Democrats have shut the government down as they demand that Covid-era enhanced Obamacare subsidies, which expire on Dec. 31, keep flowing to insurers covering these treatments.

Insurers Are Covering WHAT?

Take Colorado, which requires all insurers to cover so-called “gender affirming care” as an essential health benefit. The state’s Division of Insurance lists all the surgical and hormonal treatments that insurers cover. The list, which runs the gamut from facial feminization to gluteal implantation and implantation of testicular prostheses, includes treatments that many Americans would at best find wasteful and at worst consider morally objectionable and offensive.

Keep reading

Emails show evidence gender transition providers for kids hid what they do, misled journalists

The University of California San Francisco scrubbed its website of details on its provision of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgical removals of healthy breasts and genitals for minors, following a query from then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s show, according to a massive production to Judicial Watch in a California Public Records Act lawsuit.

The UC system’s designated campus for health sciences and University of Southern California-affiliated Children’s Health Los Angeles also hid the fact that a 9-year-old was part of their blocker study through the National Institutes of Health, when they corrected New York Times reporters who asked about an 8-year-old in the study.

The evidence of obfuscation, misleading and threatening the media – one official suggested suing Carlson before he reported anything – is sprinkled throughout nearly 2,500 pages of three-year-old internal conversations among so-called gender-affirming care leaders of UCSF and CHLA and both conservative and mainstream media. 

It suggests a pattern of withholding information that could cut the taxpayer and insurance spigot to the lucrative world of medicalized gender transitions for minors and set back gender ideology in U.S. medical institutions, which have resisted their European counterparts’ dramatic pullback on medicalized pediatric transitions.

CHLA researcher Johanna Olson-Kennedy admitted hiding the results of her NIH-funded study, that gender-confused children don’t see mental-health benefits from blockers, because “I do not want our work to be weaponized” by opponents. She also falsely characterized the study population to the Times to explain away her findings.

Much of the damage to the industry’s reputation and cash flow is self-inflicted, through its own public recordings of practitioners candidly discussing the gruesome and lucrative nature of surgeries, hormone therapy and the lifelong medical management they require, and how to overcome parental opposition to child transitions.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, which hid research on the importance of children seeing faces when it endorsed COVID-19 mask mandates, then claimed it was an accident, also banned a critic of gender ideology the morning of its conference last fall.

Keep reading

Spanberger Refuses To Condemn Male Sex Offender Using Girls’ Locker Rooms

Virginia’s Fairfax County claims there is no “probable cause” to charge Richard Cox, a Tier III registered sex offender, for allegedly exposing himself to women and girls.

Fairfax County’s refusal to charge Cox comes despite an Arlington detective’s testimony that Cox was in possession of child pornography and Fairfax County children’s swim class schedules, Cox’s previous alleged admission of his own compulsions to expose himself, and witnesses claiming that he exposed himself to women and girls in Fairfax County recreation centers’ locker rooms, ABC 7 News’ Nick Minock reported.

Abigail Spanberger, the Democrat candidate for governor in Virginia, did not respond to The Federalist’s inquiry asking whether she believes it is appropriate for males to have access to sensitive female spaces such as bathrooms and locker rooms, and whether she supports allowing men like Cox to use their supposed “transgender” identities to access sensitive women’s and children’s spaces. Spanberger has previously refused to condemn men’s access to sensitive women’s spaces, as reported by The Federalist.

In a statement Friday, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares explained that Cox’s status as a sex offender extends back to the 1990s, and that he was convicted on child pornography charges in 2006. Since then, Miyares noted, Cox has taken advantage of Virginia law that allowed him to change his driver’s license sex description to female, letting him exploit his claimed “transgender” identity and access to female spaces where he allegedly repeatedly exposed himself to women. Cox appealed to this so-called identity in a preliminary hearing in Arlington County Thursday, repeatedly claiming to be a woman and complaining that he was being “misgendered.”

The Fairfax Commonwealth Attorney’s Office “declined to participate in the prosecution of Cox” over a 2024 indecent exposure charge that was eventually dismissed, Miyares said, nor would it prosecute his reported presence near an indoor children’s playground, in violation of his status as a registered sex offender. Miyares attributed Cox’s alleged exposure of himself at an Arlington County high school — testified to in an Arlington County hearing — and other incidents to Fairfax County’s failure to prosecute Cox.

Keep reading

Swiss Man Chooses Jail Over Fine After Conviction for LGBT Comments Online

A Swiss man is choosing prison over paying a fine after courts punished him for comments on social media about biological sex.

Emanuel Brünisholz, who repairs wind instruments in Burgdorf, announced that he will serve 10 days behind bars beginning in December rather than hand over hundreds of francs to the state.

The case began nearly three years ago when Brünisholz replied to a Facebook post by Swiss National Council member Andreas Glarner.

In his response, he wrote: “If you dig up LGBTQI people after 200 years, you’ll only find men and women based on their skeletons. Everything else is a mental illness promoted through the curriculum.”

That remark was quickly flagged by activists, who reported it to police as incitement to hatred under Article 261bis, the country’s anti-discrimination law.

What was once a narrowly tailored rule to stop racist propaganda has, since 2020, been extended to cover “sexual identities.”

According to local media, this expansion opened the door for Brünisholz’s prosecution. On August 15, 2023, local police interrogated him, demanding to know his intent.

When asked what he meant by his post, he answered: “Well, that those who think there’s not just man and woman, I want to tell them that there’s only man and woman.”

As reported by Reduxx, asked about his opinion of the “LGBTQI” community, he said: “Nothing, absolutely nothing. It’s an extremist bunch. They want to silence me.”

Authorities concluded his statement demeaned LGBT individuals and thus violated human dignity.

He was fined 500 Swiss francs, with the penalty convertible into jail time if unpaid. After he contested the order, the Regional Court of Emmental Oberaargau reaffirmed the guilty verdict in December 2023 and added another 600 francs in court fees.

Instead of complying, Brünisholz declared he would not pay. On September 19, 2025, he posted an image of his summons from the Bernese Office of Justice Execution alongside the words: “It’s happening. On December 2, I’m going to prison for 10 days!”

Keep reading

‘Male pitcher’: Minnesota’s transgender radicalism lands state in violation of Title IX

The transgender radicalism in the state of Minnesota, run by Democrat Gov. Tim Walz, has landed the state in violation of federal law.

Officials there have been given 10 days by the Department of Education to comply with the federal Title IX statute or face a Department of Justice referral.

It’s because the state’s transgender agenda that infringes on the rights of girls has allowed a boy to be on a girls’ high school softball team.

The violation notice also confirmed that the state has let males into girls’ alpine skiing, girls’ Nordic skiing, girls’ lacrosse, girls’ track and field and girls’ volleyball teams.

“For too many years, Minnesota’s political leadership has found itself on the wrong side of justice, common sense, and the American people. Now the Minnesota Department of Education and the Minnesota State High School League find themselves on the wrong side of Title IX by allowing males to compete in women’s sports,” explained Craig Trainor, the DOE acting assistant secretary of civil rights.

“The Trump Administration will not allow Minnesota or any other state to sacrifice the safety, fair treatment, and dignity of its female students to appease the false idols of radical gender ideology. Once an education program or entity takes federal funds, Title IX compliance becomes mandatory. And the federal government will hold Minnesota accountable until it recognizes that fact.”

The state was allowed 10 days to change its policies to comply with federal law.

A report from Fox News said it also must comply with President Donald Trump’s “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” order.

The determination of violation came from both the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Keep reading