By Ethan Dewitt | CONCORD, N.H. – In early May, Democrats in the House defeated the “Honesty in Education Act.” The bill was the latest effort to require public school teachers to answer parents when they ask about changes to their child’s gender identity. 

But another bill is moving forward that supporters say would give parents more control over their children’s instruction in schools – and opponents say would intrude on classroom instruction.

House Bill 1312 would allow parents to opt their children out of any “instruction or program of” sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or gender expression. 

Currently, state law allows parents to withdraw their children from classes related to human sexual education. HB 1312 would expand that ability to apply to the additional topics. 

Under the existing process, parents must notify the school district in writing that they object to the class material. And the parents must propose alternative instruction that is agreed upon by the school district, and pay for it themselves if there is a cost.

HB 1312 would expand the withdrawal and require school district staff to notify parents at least two weeks in advance of any material that might fall into the category. 

Separately, the bill would prevent school districts from requiring that teachers withhold information from parents about their child’s well-being – including information about their sexuality. Individual teachers could still choose not to answer questions from parents about their child’s sexuality, but school districts could not make it a blanket policy under the bill.

The legislation, which passed the House 186-185, appears likely to clear the Republican-led Senate, too; the Senate Education Committee voted to recommend that it pass, in a 3-1, party-line vote. 

Supporters say the bill would give parents a greater say in how their children learn about sensitive topics. But opponents said the bill would empower discriminatory views against LGBTQ+ people, and that the notification process would be disruptive to teachers.

“The bill seems to be targeting, and I think stigmatizing, any instruction concerning LGBTQ+ people, and I think that this language really sends the message to LGBTQ+ students that their feelings and identities are something to be shunned, feared, potentially even censored, or not even acknowledged,” said Gilles Bissonnette, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire. 

To Sen. Tim Lang, a Sanbornton Republican, the bill would encourage parents to communicate with their children about the topics – knowing that they were coming up in the curriculum – which he said could foster better connections between parents and children.

“Parents should have these discussions with their own children and not have teachers do this. This bill is the prompt for parents to have those conversations.”

Lang said the notification requirements would not prevent school districts from teaching the topics, but would rather allow parents to choose whether to participate in them. And he argued that the bill is not intended to allow parents to withdraw their child from materials that relate to LGBTQ+ people or movements in history.

“It’s just informative to parents,” he said. “Nothing stops the school from doing those classes. The class is allowed. That just says that if you do it though, because this is a sensitive topic, you need to notify parents.”

A class about Harvey Milk, the openly gay San Francisco politician who was assassinated in 1978, would not fall under the definition of instruction of sexual orientation, Lang said, because Milk was a historical figure. But any instruction directed at students themselves that delved into their own sexual orientations or gender identity – such as that in a sex education class – would need to be disclosed, he said. 

But representatives of teachers unions said the bill as written does not make those distinctions clear. Teachers might interpret the law to mean that any class that discussed the history of LGBTQ+ rights would need to be noticed ahead of time, opponents said. And English teachers might feel compelled to disclose any book that featured LGBTQ+ characters, and to empower parents to prevent their children from reading those books.

“If you pass this bill that expands the areas that a parent is required notification of and can opt a child out of, where will it stop?” said Deb Howes, president of the American Federation of Teachers of New Hampshire. “… Can you study the pay gap between men and women in the same jobs in an economics class, which has to do with policies around gender discrimination?”

Lang disagreed with that characterization; books that happen to include transgender or non-heterosexual characters would not automatically invoke the disclosure requirement, he said. Only instruction that was specifically intended to teach students about sexual orientation or gender identity would need advanced notice, he said.

Brian Hawkins, director of government relations for the National Education Association of New Hampshire, argued that the topics the bill would add to the parental notification law were so broad that teachers would find the law difficult to follow. 

“We think that 1312 is another piece of legislation that would significantly limit educators’ ability to teach, and provides far too many instances of vague language and framework to determine when certain actions violate the statute,” Hawkins said. 

New Hampshire lawmakers first passed the law allowing parental opt-out from sex ed in 2017. In recent years, Republicans have pushed to allow more parental control over school library books, and have pressed for legislation to require teachers to answer any questions from parents about their child’s preferred pronouns or gender identity in school. 

The latest parental notification bill effort, Senate Bill 341, was “indefinitely postponed” earlier this month, on a voting day when House Democrats had a majority over Republicans in the near-evenly divided chamber. That motion means that the bill is dead and that it cannot return as an amendment to another bill this legislative session.

******************************************************************************************

Ethan DeWitt is the New Hampshire Bulletin’s education reporter. Previously, he worked as the New Hampshire State House reporter for the Concord Monitor, covering the state, the Legislature, and the New Hampshire presidential primary. A Westmoreland native, Ethan started his career as the politics and health care reporter at the Keene Sentinel. Email: [email protected]

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the New Hampshire Bulletin and is republished with permission.

The independent, nonprofit New Hampshire Bulletin is guided by these words from our state constitution: “Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive.” We will work tirelessly every day to make sure elected officials and state agencies are held to that standard.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – Over the past few weeks, Dr. Hillary Cass has begun giving interviews in the United States to defend her report targeting transgender care. The Cass Review has faced criticism for its alleged anti-trans political ties, biased findings, promotion of conversion therapists, and poor treatment of evidence regarding transgender care.

In an interview with NPR, Dr. Cass claimed that transgender individuals’ care should be judged by their “employment,” rather than their satisfaction with the care received. Later, during an interview with The New York Times, Cass misleadingly stated that she had not been contacted by any lawmakers or U.S. health bodies, despite having met with political appointees of Gov. Ron DeSantis to discuss banning trans care before her report was published.

In response, both the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Endocrine Society have categorically rejected the review as a justification for bans on care and have challenged many of its alleged findings.

In a statement released by the Endocrine Society, they reiterated that they stand by their guidelines around the provision of gender affirming care for transgender youth: “We stand firm in our support of gender-affirming care. Transgender and gender-diverse people deserve access to needed and often life-saving medical care. NHS England’s recent report, the Cass Review, does not contain any new research that would contradict the recommendations made in our Clinical Practice Guideline on gender-affirming care… Medical evidence, not politics, should inform treatment decisions.”

The Endocrine Society defended its guidelines, highlighting that they cite over 260 research studies to support their recommendations on transgender care. Moreover, the guidelines were developed with input from more than 18,000 members who had the opportunity to comment.

This process is notably more transparent than the Cass Review, whose advisory members have been kept secret. Investigations have revealed that several members are part of an anti-trans lobbying organization, SEGM, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has described as “the hub” of an “anti-LGBTQ pseudoscience network.”

“Although the scientific landscape has not changed significantly, misinformation about gender-affirming care is being politicized. In the United States, 24 states have enacted laws or policies barring adolescents’ access to gender-affirming care, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. In seven states, the policies also include provisions that would prevent at least some adults over age 18 from accessing gender-affirming care,” the Endocrine Society Letter reads, “Transgender and gender-diverse teenagers, their parents, and physicians should be able to determine the appropriate course of treatment. Banning evidence-based medical care based on misinformation takes away the ability of parents and patients to make informed decisions..”

You can see the Endocrine Society’s release here:

Similar sentiments were shared by Dr. Ben Hoffman, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, who responded to the Cass Review, “What we’re seeing more and more is that the politically infused public discourse is getting this wrong and it’s impacting the way that doctors care for their patients. Physicians must be able to practice medicine that is informed by their medical education, training, experience, and the available evidence, freely and without the threat of punishment. Instead, state legislatures have passed bills to ban and restrict gender-affirming care, which means that right now, for far too many families, their zip code determines their ability to seek the health care they need. Politicians have inserted themselves into the exam room, and this is dangerous for both physicians and for families.”

Transgender care saves lives. A Cornell review of more than 51 studies determined that trans care significantly improves the mental health of transgender people. One major study even noted a 73% lower suicidality among trans youth who began care.

In a recent article published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in April of 2024, puberty blockers were found to significantly reduce depression and anxiety. In Germany, a recent review by over 27 medical organizations has judged that “not providing treatment can do harm” to transgender youth.

The evidence around transgender care led to a historic policy resolution condemning bans on gender affirming care by the American Psychological Association, the largest psychological association in the world, which was voted on by representatives of its 157,000 members.

Interestingly, Cass herself advocated against care bans in her most recent New York Times interview released today, where she stated, “There are young people who absolutely benefit from a medical pathway, and we need to make sure that those young people have access,” although she added a caveat that those young people should be forced to consent to research in order to access care, leaving many to question the ethics of such an approach.

Transition should be measured by “employment,” not satisfaction

Regardless of Cass’s statements, her review is being used to justify bans in the United States and worldwide. In the United Kingdom, her report has led to bans on puberty blockers in England and even inquiries into adult care.

In the United States, Senators in South Carolina used it to pass a total care ban for trans youth in the state. Now, major medical organizations have responded firmly against the idea that evidence around gender affirming care is weak, challenging states who use such misleading claims to ban transgender care as practicing politics, not medicine.

You can find the statements from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Endocrine Society here:

Endocrine Society Cass Statement:

Download

AAP Cass Statement:

Download

******************************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman (she/her pronouns) and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was first published at Erin In The Morning and is republished with permission.

By James Brooks | JUNEAU, Alaska – The Alaska House of Representatives voted 22-18 late Sunday to ban transgender girls from girls’ school sports teams by limiting access to girls whose original birth certificates identify them as girls.

The decision followed hours of filibustering by a coalition of opponents, but supporters mustered enough votes to defeat dozens of amendments offered by those opponents and advanced House Bill 183 to the state Senate, where the proposal is expected to die without becoming law.

Though the Senate has said it will not hear the bill and there are no known transgender athletes in Alaska school sports, it was nonetheless a top priority for most of the House’s Republicans, who said they were responding to their constituents.

Rep. Jamie Allard, R-Anchorage, said she believes transgender girls are boys, and that the House Republicans were standing in support of other Alaskans who feel the same.

“I want you to know Alaska stands with you. I stand with you. I know my majority members stand with them too. To the parents of the children of Alaska, know we will fight. We will fight for your children. We will fight for your girls in sports,” she said.

Opponents of the bill said that if the proposal ever were to become law, it would immediately draw legal challenges for being discriminatory.

“Trans girls are girls. Our gender identity is determined in our brains, it is coded, it is fixed,” said Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage, who opposed the bill. “99.5% of us have a gender identity in our brains that matches our physical bodies, half a percent does not.”

Rep. CJ McCormick, D-Bethel, has suffered from a spinal condition since he was young. Speaking on the House floor, he said he was bullied and teased in school for being different. 

“I am a Bethel kid. I grew up in rural Alaska. I grew up with a rare spinal condition. Kids used to beat me up, just made fun of my neck,” he said.

He became friends with some of those bullies because of a shared love of sports, and he vehemently opposed the bill because it puts barriers in sports for children, he said.

“All of this debate is — we’re talking about kids! We’re talking about kids. We are attacking children!” he said.

Rep. Alyse Galvin, I-Anchorage, is the mother of a transgender daughter, and said she finds it hard to believe that Alaskans place this issue as a top priority. She said she believes “outside agitators” and social media have spun people up on the issue, but that can be overcome.

“I think we look within. We tune out the outside voices of hate, and discord. And we focus on our inside voice of love, empathy, compassion, understanding all the things that we were taught. The only way we are going to change the direction of the harmful discourse is to leave it from our hearts,” she said.

The final vote saw all 20 Republicans in the House’s majority caucus vote in favor of the bill, as did Reps. David Eastman, R-Wasilla, and Dan Ortiz, I-Ketchikan.

All of the House’s Democrats voted against the bill, as did all of its independents, with the exception of Ortiz. Rep. Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak and a minority-caucus member, was the lone Republican to vote against it.

After the bill’s passage, Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage, requested a re-vote, which may take place Tuesday. The bill is still expected to pass on that re-vote, though the vote total may change.

******************************************************************************************

James Brooks is a longtime Alaska reporter, having previously worked at the Anchorage Daily News, Juneau Empire, Kodiak Mirror and Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. A graduate of Virginia Tech, he is married to Caitlyn Ellis, owns a house in Juneau and has a small sled dog named Barley. He can be contacted at [email protected].

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the Alaska Beacon and is republished with permission.

The Alaska Beacon is an independent, nonpartisan news organization focused on connecting Alaskans to their state government. Our journalists fairly and fearlessly report on the people and interests that determine state policy.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

EUROVISION

MALMO, Sweden – Swiss Singer Nemo won the Eurovision Song Contest with their operatic pop-rap song “The Code,” about their journey to accepting their nonbinary identity. 

“I went to Hell and back, To find myself on track, I broke the code,” Nemo sang in the chorus of his winning song.

Dressed in a frilly pink blouse and miniskirt, Nemo dazzled the audience at the Malmo Arena in Sweden, home to last year’s winner, Loreen.

Nemo’s win is the first win for Switzerland since Canadian singer Celine Dion competed under the Swiss flag in 1988.

The Eurovision Song Contest is an annual competition held by the European Broadcasting Union since 1956, in which representatives of all member states present original songs. The entrants are voted upon by a panel of judges and by viewing audiences, who award points to their ten favorite performances. 

Over the years, the competition has become well-known as a camp spectacle and a favorite event for the European LGBT community, with many high-profile queer competitors and winners, including Austrian drag queen Conchita Wurst, who returned to this year’s show to perform a tribute to ABBA, who won the competition for Sweden with the song “Waterloo” in 1974.

This year’s UK entrant was openly gay performer Olly Alexander, formerly of the band Years & Years. His song “Dizzy,” a homoerotic pop-dance track that featured a quartet of dancing boxers, finished in 18^th place with only 46 points, after receiving no points from the voting audience.

This year’s competition was not without controversy. 

The venue was met with a large protest demanding that Israel, which has competed in Eurovision since 1973, be removed from the competition due to the ongoing war in Gaza. Additional security measures were put in place for the competition

Israel’s entrant, Edan Golan, had been a favorite early in the competition, but her song “Hurricane” finished fifth. The song had also drawn controversy, and Golan was ordered to change the title and lyrics by the EBU from “October Rain” due to its references to the October 7 attacks on Israel. 

Golan travelled with agents of the Israeli Security Agency Shin Bet after death threats were made on her social media. 

Additionally, Dutch performer Joost Klein was disqualified ahead of the final competition after an alleged altercation with a female production staffer that has led to a police investigation.

UNITED KINGDOM

LONDON, United Kingdom – Actor Ian Gelder, best known for his role as Kevan Lannister in the HBO series Game of Thrones has passed away at age 74, five months after he was diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer.

Gelder’s husband Ben Daniels announced his passing in a post on Instagram on Tuesday.

“It is with huge, huge sadness and a heavy heart broken into a million pieces that I’m leaving this post to announce the passing of my darling husband and life partner Ian Gelder,” Daniels wrote in the caption of a photo taken of the couple at Christmas, shortly after Gelder’s first round of treatment for his cancer.

“He was my absolute rock and we’d been partners for more than 30 years. If we weren’t together, we spoke to each other every day. He was the kindest, most generous spirited and loving human being. He was a wonderful, wonderful actor and everyone who worked with him was touched by his heart and light,” Daniels wrote.

Gelder was diagnosed with bile duct cancer in December. Such cancers are often not detected by health care providers until they have spread to other parts of the body. 

Gelder had a long career in film and television and on the British stage, frequently appearing on London’s West End and Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre. 

Among his numerous television appearances was a stint on the Doctor Who spinoff Torchwood, and the celebrated UK sitcom Absolutely Fabulous.

POLAND

ŁÓDŹ, Poland – Declaring that she would “go to hell and make a deal with the devil” to advance the rights of Poland’s LGBTQ community, Equalities Minister Katarzyna Kotula joined the Equality March in Łódź, the country’s fourth-largest city, on May 11.

The March was the 13^th edition of the event, and the first time it had been attended by a government minister. 

Last year, Poland elected a new government coalition of center-left leaning parties that have pledged to support LGBT rights, a sharp contrast to the right-wing, LGBT-hostile government that preceded them. 

Still, the government has been slow to act on its stated promises to the LGBT community, including a law on civil unions, a ban on hate speech, and a gender recognition act, amid squabbling from more conservative members of the coalition. 

Kotula has said that she’s waiting to introduce the civil union bill until she can get agreement from the coalition on key sticking points, including adoption rights. 

“For civil partnerships, for marriage equality, for the Gender Reconciliation Act, for dignity and human rights for the LGBT community, I will go to hell and make a pact with the devil. I promise that when we meet here next year, at least some of these demands will be implemented,” Kotula said at the March. “I will do everything to take care of your dignity and your safety.”

The organizers of the march, The Equality Factory, are calling for even greater rights, including full marriage equality, abortion and contraception rights, comprehensive sex education in schools, and facilitation of medical treatment for gender transition. 

“We are marching because words about equality cannot be thrown around. We are not a bargaining chip. We were promised something and the election promises should be fulfilled. The most important requirement to be implemented is the Act on civil partnerships. This is not only about LGBTQ+ people, but also about protecting heterosexual people in relationships, because there is no such thing as cohabitation in Polish law. This should be important for all Poles,” Ida Mickiewicz-Florczak from the Equality Factory told the Polish news site Odaka.

Even if the civil partnership law passes through Parliament, it may face a veto from President Andrzej Duda of the opposition Law and Justice Party, which has vociferously opposed LGBT rights. So far, Duda, who will be in office until presidential elections in May 2025, has not indicated how he will act on the bill, stating he’s waiting until it is introduced to comment.

SOUTH KOREA

SEOUL, South Korea – The Seoul Queer Culture Festival has found a new home after two years of struggle with the city council repeated denying permits for the annual festival.

The Queer Culture Festival had been held at Seoul Plaza at city hall ever since 2015, but last year it was denied a permit, which the conservative-leaning city council decided to give to a Christian youth concert instead. This year, the city council has announced that the plaza is being used for a outdoor library all through spring and summer, effectively blocking all event applications.

“I think Seoul city is focusing on events that only suit its taste,” Yang Sun-woo, chief organiser of the festival, told Reuters. “If Seoul cared about LGBT people, they would have understood the significance of the event,” Yang said.

In response, organizers of the Queer Culture Festival have decided this year’s edition will take place on a several blocks in downtown Seoul, which only required the permission of police, rather than city council.

The festival, which takes place over two weeks in June, kicks off with a parade on June 1 and will feature a queer film festival, live performances, and 60 booths for vendors and interactive events.

For its part, Seoul City Council denies that anti-LGBT discrimination played a part in its decision to twice deny permits for the event. 

The city government said it is “always listening to voices and providing necessary support to protect human rights of LGBTQ people as members of society,” in a statement.

The Queer Culture Festival was also denied a permit by the Seoul History Museum.

The US Embassy in Seoul will also support the event, as it has in previous years.

“As in past years, embassy representatives will join in Pride events worldwide, including here in the Republic of Korea, to raise awareness of the challenges faced by LGBTQI+ individuals,” the embassy told Reuters in a statement.

AUSTRALIA

SYDNEY, Australia – Cumberland, New South Wales drew international headlines this week after its city council voted 6-5 to ban books on same-sex parenting from local libraries. Four councilors were not present for the May 1 vote.

The motion amends the council’s library strategy to order “That Council take immediate action to rid same sex parents books/materials in Council’s library service.”

The move from the council, which represents around 250,000 people in the western suburbs of Sydney, was swiftly condemned by residents, LGBT leaders, and representatives of the state government.

New South Wales Attorney-General Michael Daley has referred the motion to the state’s Anti-Discrimination Board for advice, while Arts Minister John Graham has warned the council that the new policy directive puts state library funding for the council in jeopardy, as it would breach public library guidelines. He’s asked council to reconsider the ban.

“It’s a terrible message to send, to have this councilor importing this US culture war into our country and playing it out on the shelves of the local library,” Graham said on a morning television show. “I think the community expectations are clear — the local councilor should be coming around to pick up their bin, not telling them what to read.”

Cumberland’s local council is dominated by the relatively LGBT-friendly Australian Labor Party, but the motion from Our Local Government Party Councilor Steve Christou carried with support from Liberal-Party-affiliated Independents and a single vote from a Labor councilor, who has since been condemned by the party.

The move comes just a few months after the same council voted to ban drag queen storytime events at local libraries.

Christou says the motion was inspired after he received complaints from constituents who saw the book Same-Sex Parents by Holly Duhig on display in the children’s section of a library. The book explores what it’s like to have two moms or two dads from a child’s perspective.

During the debate on the motion, Christou alleged that the book “sexualized” children and repeated dog-whistle allegations against queer people and parents.

“We’re going to make it clear tonight that … these kind of books, same-sex parents books, don’t find their way to our kids,” Christou said, according to The Guardian. “Our kids shouldn’t be sexualised.”

Christou said the proposed amendment was “for the protection and safety of our children”.

“Hands off our kids,” he repeated.

Christou has said the amendment was demanded by his community, which he says is a “very religious community,” despite the fact that a petition against the amendment garnered more than 10,000 signatures in 24 hours.

“This community is a very religious community, a very family-orientated community.

“They don’t want such controversial issues going against their beliefs indoctrinated to their libraries. This is not Marrickville or Newtown, this is Cumberland city council.”

The petition was launched by a Cumberland area grandmother to what she describes as a “rainbow family” Caroline Staples. Staples will present her petition to council on May 15. 

Global LGBTQ+ news gathering & reporting by Rob Salerno 

PRETORIA, South Africa — South African LGBTQ+ organizations have welcomed a new law that seeks to combat hate crimes and hate speech.

President Cyril Ramaphosa on May 9 signed the Preventing and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill that had been introduced in 2018.

According to the new law; the direct or indirect unfair discrimination against anyone on the grounds of age, albinism, culture, disability, ethnic or social origin, gender, HIV status, language, nationality, migrant, refugee status, asylum seekers, occupation, trade, political affiliation, conviction, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, sex characteristics or skin color is a criminal offense punishable by a fine or up to eight years in prison.

“A hate crime is committed if a person commits any recognized offense under any law that is motivated by prejudice or intolerance based on one or more characteristics or perceived characteristics of the victim, as listed in the legislation or a family member of the victim,” said the president’s office. “The law also makes it an offense when speech material is intentionally distributed or made available in electronic communication, and the said person knows that such electronic communication constitutes hate speech.”

Crimen injuria, the unlawful and intentional impairing of dignity or privacy of another person under common law, was in place before the new law. Crimen injuria, which to extent protected some forms of hate against the LGBTQ+ community, is still active.

The Preventing and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill, however, is more comprehensive in the sense that it particularly focuses on hate speech and hate crimes, and therefore makes it easier to seek legal recourse than under crimen injuria.

“As Out, we commend President Cyril Ramaphosa on the move that he has made in making sure that the rights of LGBTQ+ persons are protected. We, as Out, also hope that other African countries can learn from this historic milestone that all people are equal and that their rights should be protected,” said Out LGBT South Rights Human Rights Coordinator Sibonelo Ncanana. 

Ncanana specifically applauded Deputy Justice and Constitutional Development Minister John Jeffrey and the working group that helped secure the bill’s passage.

“We hope that all government departments will enforce the mandate of the act,” said Ncanana. “We also hope that it will help in decreasing the amount of hate crimes that are happening in South Africa, create safer communities, and that LGBTQ+ people will find themselves safe.”

Ruth Maseko of Umndeni LGBTI Group and the Triangle Project said the new law creates a precedent of what constitutes hate crime and the repercussions.

“We are delighted at the passing of the bill after so many years, as it creates a legal definition of hate crimes,” said Maseko. “This now puts in place mechanisms for authorities to collect and report details about these incidents of hate for the effective monitoring, analysis of trends, and appropriate interventions that are needed.”

Maseko added that although the new law will aid in giving the courts a framework to work in when handling cases of hate, it will not really deter people from committing those crimes.

“The new law will provide quantitative and qualitative data as currently we have no way of telling how many of these crimes are committed. The only way we know, is when they are reported to a civil society organization or are reported in the media,” said Maseko.

“Although it will do nothing to change the attitudes of people who act out in these ways, the law does send out a message that hate crimes will not be tolerated in South Africa and will provide additional tools to investigators and prosecutors to hold perpetrators accountable for their actions,” added Maseko.

The law, however, does not consider actions undertaken in good faith as part of hate speech. They include artistic creativity, performance or other form of expression, academic or scientific inquiry fair, and accurate reporting or commentary in the public interest. 

It also excludes interpretation and articulating or espousing of any religious conviction, tenet, belief, teaching, doctrine or writing that does not advocate hatred or constitutes incitement to cause harm. The law also contains directives on training and other measures to be undertaken by the South African Police Service and the National Prosecuting Authority to ensure effective processing of the newly defined crimes. 

By Tess Vrbin | LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – The Arkansas State Library Board on Friday voted down two motions to withhold state funding from public libraries that board member Jason Rapert put forth in his ongoing opposition to the presence of certain books on library shelves.

The former Republican state senator from Conway reintroduced a motion he proposed at February’s board meeting to suspend funding for libraries suing the state until the litigation is concluded. The proposal died for lack of a second in February. On Friday, the other six members of the board voted against the motion while Rapert was the only one to vote for it.

Rapert also moved to withhold funds for “any library that allows unrestricted access to books or materials that contain sexually explicit, obscene or pornographic materials to minors,” based on the results of a survey he requested in February. The motion failed with the same results.

State Library Director Jennifer Chilcoat circulated Rapert’s request to find out whether a list of books he considers inappropriate for minors are available on library shelves statewide, and Rapert said the survey revealed the presence of 352 “objectionable” books. He did not say how many of the state’s dozens of library systems responded or did not respond to the survey.

The board does not “have any way to determine which libraries might be knowingly making obscene materials available for children,” board Chairwoman Deborah Knox of Mountain Home said.

“I’m having a hard time believing that any of our public libraries are doing that, and I would hate to approve a motion inhibiting distribution of funds to those libraries when we have no way of knowing if those libraries even exist,” Knox said.

Rapert said the survey results prove otherwise.

“You can claim all this stuff, going around and around in circles, acting like you don’t know that there’s explicit material teaching kids how to give oral sex to each other,” he said, raising his voice. “I hope every community in the state watches this [meeting]. I am appalled that any adult would try to stop us from taking a stand against this junk on library shelves.”

Both of Rapert’s motions would have applied to distributions of funding at future board meetings, since they were introduced after the board voted to give public libraries their allotted share of state money for the final quarter of fiscal year 2024. Rapert was the only member to vote against the disbursement.

Shari Bales of Hot Springs, who was confirmed to the board by the state Senate along with Rapert in December, asked who is responsible for determining whether a book’s content is sexually explicit or pornographic. Rapert responded by amending his motion to specify “sexually explicit, obscene or pornographic materials… as described in Act 372.”

The 2023 law in question would alter Arkansas libraries’ processes for reconsidering material and create criminal liability for librarians who distribute content that some consider “obscene” or “harmful to minors.” The law mentions the word “obscene” several times but does not define it, and it does not include “sexually explicit” or “pornographic” in the text at all.

The law’s first section does include the phrase “furnishing a harmful item to a minor,” defining “item” as “a material or performance that depicts or describes nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or sadomasochistic abuse.”

A federal judge temporarily blocked two portions of Act 372, including the first section, in July before it went into effect. U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks wrote in his preliminary injunction order that the two sections could lead to arbitrary interpretation and “content-based restrictions” that violate the First Amendment. The case is scheduled for trial in October.

The Central Arkansas Library System (CALS), the Fayetteville Public Library and the Eureka Springs Carnegie Public Library are among the 19 plaintiffs challenging the law.

Rapert’s amended motion died for lack of a second before the original motion failed.

Over the last few years, hard-right conservatives in Arkansas have tried to tie library funding to whether certain books are available on shelves. In November 2022, a narrowly-approved ballot measure cut Craighead County libraries’ funding in half after protests over an LGBTQ+ book display and a transgender author’s visit to the library.

Republican state Sen. Dan Sullivan of Jonesboro, the seat of Craighead County, was the primary sponsor of Act 372 in the Legislature. In October, he said the state should withhold funding from the Arkansas Library Association (ArLA), a nonprofit trade association that does not receive state funding.

Many local Arkansas libraries are ArLA members, and the organization is among the plaintiffs challenging Act 372.

Board discussion

Bales said she thought Rapert’s motion about explicit content “sounds a lot like legislation” and was outside the board’s purview. She emphasized that her opposition to the motion did not mean she wanted her children to read “dirty books.”

“I think we should err on the side of staying in our lane and wearing the hats that have been assigned to us,” she said. “…It may be a really good idea, but sometimes really good ideas are not always really good policies.”

Bales also repeated her concerns from February about Rapert’s proposal to withhold funding for libraries suing the state. Rapert argued again that a state entity should not provide money to plaintiffs that could use it to pay their attorneys. Bales said the plaintiffs might be using private funds for this purpose, which would make withholding public funds “a moot point” and possibly “coercion.”

Rapert said it was an “exaggeration” that his proposal might be coercive to the entities that the board funds. He also said the state Legislature can dissolve state boards that do not “do their jobs.”

“We’re the ones that decide how the money is disbursed, and if you don’t understand that… maybe you need to revisit what you’re on the board for,” he said.

Rapert asked Chilcoat to place an item on the agenda for the board’s next meeting in August to “assess and handle” the presence of “pornographic” books in libraries. He did not name any of the books in question, which he did in February, but he mentioned a book with an incest scene that “shocked” him.

Board member Lupe Peña de Martinez of Mabelvale said she recently read six of the books Rapert opposes, including the one with the scene he mentioned. She said her 13-year-old child is not currently allowed to read the books but will someday be mature enough to read them.

Books that depict sexual abuse of children by adults, including incest, are intended as resources for children who have experienced this, Peña de Martinez said, and making these books unavailable to minors across the board “is exercising the privilege of a much more comfortable life.”

“I am repulsed by what’s in those books, but not because I’m upset with the authors,” she said. “I’m repulsed at what children are victim to… If we read the books cover to cover, it’s not about exposing children to lewd content. It’s about saying, ‘This is not right, and there are adults who love you and want to protect you.’”

Peña de Martinez’s comments received applause from the librarians in the audience.

Rapert acknowledged that these issues are real but said some books “are actually grooming children, and that is another problem.”

******************************************************************************************

Tess Vrbin came to the Advocate from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, where she reported on low-income housing and tenants’ rights, and won awards for her coverage of 2021 flooding and tornado damage in rural Arkansas. She previously covered local government for The Commercial Dispatch in Mississippi and state government for the Columbia Daily Tribune in Missouri.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the Arkansas Advocate and is republished with permission.

The Arkansas Advocate is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization dedicated to tough, fair daily reporting and investigative journalism that holds public officials accountable and focuses on the relationship between the lives of Arkansans and public policy. This service is free to readers and other news outlets.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST – DONATE!

By Paulo Murillo | WEST HOLLYWOOD – Community members gathered at Williams S Hart Park at 8341 De Longpre Avenue for a public art dedication event for the installation of the public artwork Rainbow Neon Dog on Friday, May 10, 2024.

The event offered some words by Rebecca Ehemann, WeHo Arts Manager of the City of West Hollywood, who introduced Mayor John Erickson to the podium with Pet Mayor Winnie. “This is the best part about being in the City of West Hollywood,” said Mayor Erickson. “We have our amazing Arts Department. Thank you so much for all of the amazing work that you do. We are just so excited to welcome the Rainbow Neon Dog as part of our city’s urban art collection.”

The mayor made a joke about his motor being slow every now and then in reference to the neon art that stopped rotating shortly after being installed. “We’re excited to see it start spinning again and have it at this entrance right here at our beautiful historic William S. Hart park at 10 feet high 10 feet wide. And three feet deep as radium barking neon dog is the perfect way to announce a presence here at this park.

Also in attendance were council member Chelsea Byers and council member Lauren Meister.

The Rainbow Neon Dog may not spin, but it still lights up. There was a countdown to its lighting as part of the ceremony. Community members had an opportunity to enjoy the art installation and walk away with a custom pin in the shape of the neon art as a memento.

There were rumors that some local residents were going to use the dedication to protest improvements coming to Hart Park; however, the rumors turned out to be false. The ceremony happened in perfect harmony.

@wehotimes A City of West Hollywood CLASSIC is BACK!!! The Neon Dog is fully restored and installed at its new home on The Sunset Strip. On Wednesday, September 14, 2022, the City of Los Angeles Cultural Affairs Commission unanimously approved the proposed Neon Dog project for installation at William S. Hart Park & Off Leash Dog Park, a property leased by the City of West Hollywood, but owned by the City of Los Angeles. The neon dog was connected to Collar & Leash. On January 21, 2020, the City Council accepted a gift of the neon dog sign from Joseph Chan and Charles Chan Massey. The neon sign was restored and conserved very much like the Rocky & Bullwinkle sculpture that is also on display on Sunset Boulevard. #wehotimes #wehonews #wehocity #weho #westhollywood #neon #neonart #wehoarts #art #streetart #thesunsetstrip @weholove @Paulo Murillo @City of West Hollywood @CityofLosAngeles ♬ Monkeys Spinning Monkeys – Kevin MacLeod & Kevin The Monkey

The Rainbow Neon Dog is the most recent addition to the City’s growing Urban Art Program and consists of a reconditioned, electrically rotating neon sign in the shape of a barking dog set atop a supporting pole that raises it above street level to be enjoyed by pedestrians and vehicles alike traveling along Sunset Boulevard in either direction.

The sign measures 10-feet-high by 10-feet-wide by 3-feet-deep. It was designed in 1990 by Wilson Ong for the Collar & Leash pet store formerly located at 8555 Santa Monica Boulevard. In 2020, after the closure of the store, the owners gifted the sign to the City of West Hollywood for inclusion in the Urban Art Program collection.

At its new location along the iconic Sunset Strip, the sign is guaranteed to become a novel cultural attraction and will serve as a wayfinding device for the entrance to Hart Park while continuing the City’s efforts to activate Sunset Boulevard with pedestrian-friendly experiences.

The Urban Art Program provides a mechanism to integrate free and accessible art into the urban fabric of the City. In particular, the Urban Art Program is motivated by a desire to ameliorate some of the effects new development has on the community. New development often results in intensified use of land where larger structures seem imposing and inaccessible to the public. Urban art can help soften this effect and provide interaction and connection between the public and private domains.

******************************************************************************************

Paulo Murillo is Editor in Chief and Publisher of WEHO TIMES. He brings over 20 years of experience as a columnist, reporter, and photo journalist. Murillo began his professional writing career as the author of “Love Ya, Mean It,” an irreverent and sometimes controversial West Hollywood lifestyle column for FAB! newspaper. His work has appeared in numerous print and online publications, which include the “Hot Topic” column in Frontiers magazine, where he covered breaking news and local events in West Hollywood. He can be reached at [email protected]

The preceding article was previously published at WeHo Times and is republished with permission.

By Marta Aldrich | NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Tennessee teachers can move forward with their lawsuit challenging a 3-year-old state law restricting what they can teach about race, gender, and bias.

U.S. District Court Judge Aleta Trauger denied the state’s motion to dismiss the case.

The Nashville judge also sided with educators over questions of whether they have legal grounds to sue the state, plus whether the federal court is the appropriate jurisdiction to take up complaints about the 2021 state law.

And in a 50-page memorandum to explain her single-page order, Trauger was frequently critical of the statute, which restricts teachers from discussing 14 concepts that the Republican-controlled legislature deemed cynical or divisive. She also cited shortcomings of related rules, developed by the state education department, to outline the processes for filing and investigating complaints, appealing decisions, and levying punishment that could strip teachers of their licenses and school districts of state funding.

“The Act simply invites a vast array of potentially dissatisfied individuals to lodge complaints based on their understanding of those concepts and then calls on the Commissioner [of Education], as a sort of state philosopher, to think deeply about what equality, impartiality, and other abstract concepts really mean and enforce the Act accordingly,” Trauger wrote in her May 2 memorandum.

“I’m thrilled that the judge listened to our concerns as educators and seemed to understand that this law puts teachers in an impossible position,”– Kathryn Vaughn, Tipton County teacher

Meanwhile, educators are at the mercy of the personal biases of authorities, which is “exactly what the doctrine of unconstitutional vagueness is intended to guard against,” she said.

The so-called prohibited concepts law was among the first of its kind in the nation that passed amid a conservative backlash to the racial-justice movement and protests prompted by the 2020 murder of George Floyd by a white police officer in Minneapolis.

Among its prohibitions are classroom discussions about whether “an individual, by virtue of the individual’s race or sex, is inherently privileged, racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or subconsciously.”

The law’s defenders note that it permits an “impartial discussion of controversial aspects of history,” or as Rep. John Ragan, the House sponsor, described it: “facts-based” instruction.

But teachers say they don’t know how to be impartial when teaching about the theories of racial superiority that led to slavery and Jim Crow laws. The resulting confusion has influenced the small but pivotal decisions they make every day about how to prepare for a lesson, what materials to use, and how to answer a student’s question, ultimately stifling classroom discussion, many critics of the law assert.

Last July, lawyers for five public school educators and the Tennessee Education Association, the state’s largest teacher organization, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Nashville.

The suit says the language of the law is unconstitutionally vague and that the state’s enforcement plan is subjective. The complaint also says the statute interferes with instruction on difficult but important topics included in state-approved academic standards, which dictate other decisions around curriculum and testing.

Trauger, who taught school for three years before entering law school, suggested that the ambiguity could lead to a lack of due process for educators under the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

“That does not mean that a law has to be wise or perfect or crystal clear, but it must mean something concrete and specific that a well-informed person can understand by reading its text,” she wrote in her memorandum.

Kathryn Vaughn, a Tipton County teacher who is among the plaintiffs, called the judge’s decision an important early step in the legal challenge.

“I’m thrilled that the judge listened to our concerns as educators and seemed to understand that this law puts teachers in an impossible position,” she told Chalkbeat on Thursday.

A spokesperson for the state attorney general’s office, which filed a motion for dismissal last September, declined to comment on the new development.

The judge set a June 17 scheduling meeting with attorneys in the case to discuss how to manage the litigation going forward.

******************************************************************************************

Marta Aldrich is Senior Statehouse Correspondent for Chalkbeat Tennessee.

This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

Sign up for Chalkbeat Tennessee’s free daily newsletter to keep up with statewide education policy and Memphis-Shelby County Schools.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the Tennessee Lookout and is republished with permission.

Now more than ever, tough and fair journalism is important. The Tennessee Lookout is your watchdog, telling the stories of politics and policy that affect the people of the Volunteer State.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

By Piper Hutchinson | BATON ROUGE, La. – Republican lawmakers plan to leave in a section of the Louisiana constitution that defines marriage as between one man and one woman during a potential constitutional rewrite despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling. 

Rep. Beau Beaullieu, R-New Iberia, the lawmaker carrying the legislation calling for a constitutional convention, said his conservative colleagues want to leave in the “Defense of Marriage” section just in case the landmark 2015 civil rights case Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, is overturned. 

“I’ve had requests to leave it in. I haven’t had any requests to remove it,” Beaullieu said in an interview with the Illuminator. Beaullieu declined to name who requested to leave the unconstitutional section in, but said he received “many” requests to do so. 

About 62% of Louisianians support same-sex marriage, according to a 2022 survey from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute, which also found approximately half of Republicans nationwide support same-sex marriage. 

Lawmakers are currently discussing Beaullieu’s House Bill 800 that would assemble a constitutional convention, with 144 legislators and 27 delegates appointed by the governor meeting to make changes to the document. 

Beaullieu has said the delegates would use the convention to move some portions of the constitution into statute, which would make it substantially easier for legislators to change them. 

Neither Beaullieu or Republican Gov. Jeff Landry, who is the driving force behind the convention, has been forthcoming about what they want to remove from the constitution, although they have promised to wall off public school funding protections and the homestead exemption property tax break in the constitution. While lawmakers have billed this as a limited convention to “refresh” the constitution, delegates likely would have authority to change anything they wanted. 

Kate Kelly, a spokesperson for Landry, did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

Article XII Section 15 of the 1973 constitution

Marriage in the state of Louisiana shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall construe this constitution or any state law to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any member of a union other than the union of one man and one woman. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall recognize any marriage contracted in any other jurisdiction which is not the union of one man and one woman.

The Louisiana State Law Institute, which is required by law to provide a report on unconstitutional and preempted state laws to the legislature every other year, has included this portion of the constitution in every report since 2016. 

The Institute has recommended the legislature pass a constitutional amendment to the voters to change the definition as not a marriage between one man and one woman, but as between two natural persons. 

While the legislature has declined to do this, it has instructed new printings of the constitution to include a note regarding the Obergefell decision below the section. 

In Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court found that same-sex couples could not be deprived the right to marry under 14th Amendment protections. As a result of this ruling, same-sex couples now have a legal right to marry in every U.S. state. 

After the Obergefell ruling, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed its ruling in Robicheaux v. Caldwell, which in 2014 upheld Louisiana’s ban on same-sex marriage. In the Robicheaux reversal order, the court explicitly stated that the portion of Louisiana’s constitution banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. 

Article XII Section 15 was added to the constitution in 2004 after being approved by 78% of voters. The constitutional amendment was proposed by then state Rep. Steve Scalise, who is now the U.S. House majority leader. 

Legislators have made several attempts to repeal this portion of the constitution, most recently in the current legislative session. House Bill 98 by Rep. Mandie Landry, D-New Orleans, was shelved in its first committee hearing. The bill would have complied with the Louisiana Law Institute’s recommendation by defining marriage as “the union of two persons.” 

Landry said she intends to bring up the proposal again if the constitutional convention happens. 

The bill was sidelined at the request of House Speaker Pro Tempore Rep. Mike Johnson, R-Pineville, who argued the Legislature should avoid advancing bills that would put constitutional questions on the ballot in light of the potential constitutional convention. 

Rep. Landry argued it’s important to repeal that section of the constitution not just for symbolic reasons, but because many fear further legal attacks on same-sex marriage. 

“Younger people don’t stay up at night thinking they want to leave here because the Constitution is too long, but they do think about and they do leave because of issues like same sex, marriage, abortion, reproductive issues,” she said. 

Beaullieu’s bill, which calls for a constitutional convention this summer, has received approval from the House of Representatives but has not yet been scheduled for a hearing in the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee. 

If a convention was held — which is still uncertain due to skepticism from senators — it would take place in three stages: An organizational session to select convention leaders could take place as soon as May 30. Convention committees would then meet in June and July to discuss potential constitutional changes, and wrap up their work by Aug. 1, when the full convention would then meet until Aug. 15. The finished product would then be on a ballot for voter approval at the same time of the presidential election in November.

****************************************************************************************** 

Piper Hutchinson is a reporter for the Louisiana Illuminator. She has covered the Legislature and state government extensively for the LSU Manship News Service and The Reveille, where she was named editor in chief for summer 2022.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the Louisiana Illuminator and is republished with permission.

The Louisiana Illuminator is an independent, nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization with a mission to cast light on how decisions in Baton Rouge are made and how they affect the lives of everyday Louisianians. Our in-depth investigations and news stories, news briefs and commentary help residents make sense of how state policies help or hurt them and their neighbors statewide.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

PHILADELPHIA, Penn. – The Pennsylvania State Police who executed a violent traffic stop on the morning of March 2, arresting Celena Morrison-McLean, executive director of Philadelphia Mayor’s Office of LGBT Affairs, and her husband Darius McLean on a Philadelphia expressway, is no longer employed by the State Police.

In a statement to multiple media outlets, Pennsylvania State Police spokesman Lt. Adam Reed said that the trooper, whose name has not been released, is no longer employed although Reed did not specify if the trooper resigned or was terminated by the agency.

According to Reed the trooper had been placed on restricted duty following the incident and was not on patrol during the investigation of the incident.

Appearing before reporters in a press conference on March 9, the executive director of Philadelphia Mayor’s Office of LGBT Affairs accused the State Police trooper who executed a violent traffic stop last weekend involving her and her husband of racial profiling.

The couple alongside with their attorneys, said they’re considering a lawsuit following a violent incident in a traffic stop last weekend during which the couple alleges the state trooper unjustly pulled her over and arrested her and her husband because they’re Black. 

Philadelphia LGBT executive says state trooper racially profiled her

“Darius and I did nothing wrong and did not deserve to be treated the way we were treated during the arrest,” Morrison-McLean said. “At a minimum, the Pennsylvania State Police owe Darius and I an apology that is equally as public as the way they disregarded our rights on Interstate 76.”

In a police report, the trooper said McLean became verbally combative toward him, but the couple’s attorney, Kevin Mincey, said the trooper was the aggressor, claiming he pulled out his service weapon and forced McLean out of the car.

Mobile phone video of what followed went viral on social media. Morrison-McLean can be heard in the background screaming for her husband as the trooper cuffed him, who was on the ground at this point. She told the trooper that she worked “for the mayor”, to which he responded: “Shut the fuck up.”

“Darius had his hands up, window down and his hazards on,” Mincey said. “He explained, ‘I stopped because you pulled over my wife.’”

Penn. state trooper in altercation with prominent LGBTQ+ leader

Pennsylvania State Police alleged McLean refused multiple lawful orders from the trooper, who then arrested him. “There’s no resistance by Celena,” Mincey said. “No resistance by Darius.”

Morrison-McLean told the reporters gathered for the press conference: “I’ve never felt more helpless than in those moments. It’s disheartening that, as Black individuals, we are all too familiar with the use of the phrase, ‘Stop resisting,’ as a green light for excessive force by law enforcement.”

The Pennsylvania State Police spokesman also said that the agency will not have further comment on this incident.