Juneteenth & More, in Peace & Justice History for 6/19

June 19, 1865

Known among African Americans as Juneteenth (also Freedom Day, Jubilee Day, Liberation Day, or Emancipation Day), this is the day enslaved people in Texas and parts of Louisiana learned they had been freed by President Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. 
U.S. Major General Gordon Granger landed at Galveston, Texas, and announced the order that the slaves had been freed. This was two-and-a-half years after the Proclamation had taken effect January 1, 1863. It had stated, “that all persons held as slaves” within the rebellious (Confederate) states “shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free.” This had been kept from the slaves so the slaveowners could reap additional harvests, or because there weren’t enough Union soldiers to enforce the order until Granger arrived, but Juneteenth is the celebration of that day….

A Junetheenth celebration Richmond. Photo from Library of Congress (maybe 1921)
Learn More About Juneteenth?  New York Times
“Black Joy—Not Corporate Acknowledgment—Is the Heart of Juneteenth”  The Atlantic
June 19, 1964

Two hundred college students left Oxford, Ohio’s Western College for Women to join hundreds of other civil rights volunteers in Mississippi as part of “Freedom Summer.”
Under the umbrella organization of COFO(Council of Federated Organizations) they worked on projects across the state.Led by SNCC (Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee) and CORE (Congress of Racial Equality) field secretaries, they helped Negroes try to register to vote, they taught in Freedom Schools, participated in community organizing and, in doing so, endured the hostility toward civil rights work among whites in the deep South. “If we can crack Mississippi,” the students said, “we can crack segregation anywhere.”


Mississippi Freedom Summer Volunteers singing We Shall Overcome, 1964<
Student protestors are photographed by a policeman on Freedom Day in Greenwood, Mississippi in 1964.

ROBERT MOSES, director of the 1964 Mississippi Summer Project and leader of the training program in Oxford, is shown here during a break in a session which he conducted in Jackson, Mississippi, to prepare African-Americans for politically effective action.
more photos 
Good background on the need for a “Freedom Summer” 
June 19, 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was approved after surviving an 83-day filibuster in the United States Senate. The new law, initiated and passed through the determination of President Lyndon Johnson and Senate Republican leader Everett Dirksen of Illinois, guaranteed for the first time equal access to public accommodations “without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.”

Massive demonstrations a year earlier ensured passage of the Acts
The Senate had never before voted to end the filibuster of a civil rights bill, all of which were consistently opposed by the bloc of senators from the South. Following Senator Robert Byrd’s (D-West Virginia) 14+ hour-long speech, Senator Dirksen rose to speak, “We dare not temporize with the issue which is before us. It is essentially moral in character. It must be resolved. It will not go away. Its time has come.”

About the Civil Rights Act 
June 19, 1982
One thousand landowners occupied key islands in protest against French nuclear weapons tests at Kwajalein Atoll.The atoll, part of the Marshall Islands in the western Pacific Ocean, is about 2100 miles [3400 km] southwest of Hawaii and 1400 miles [2250 km] east of Guam. The island is now home to USAKA (United States Army Kwajalein Atoll), the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site, and about 2000 support personnel and family members on Kwajalein and the islands Roi and Namur.

Kwajalein Atoll
Struggles of Pacific Islanders to stop nuclear testing 
June 19, 1987
U.S. Supreme Court ruled teaching of creationism in public schools to be a violation of the U.S. constitution’s prohibition on establishment of religion by the government [Edwards v. Aguillard]. Students, parents and teachers had contested the Louisiana “Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction” law (Creationism Act). It required schools that taught evolution to also teach creation science. “The preeminent purpose of the Louisiana Legislature was clearly to advance the religious viewpoint that a supernatural being created humankind,” concluded Justice William Brennan in his majority opinion.
(I’m inserting this, because it’s not yet made it into the newsletter. -A)
June 17, 2021 (for June 19)
President Joe Biden declared Juneteenth a national holiday. Read a bit about the significance here, from the National Museum of African American History & Culture:
“This year marks the second anniversary since President Joe Biden named Juneteenth a federal holiday in 2021.
“As more Americans celebrate Juneteenth with family and community, it is vital to share the important historical legacy behind Juneteenth and recognize the long struggle to make it an officially recognized holiday. It is an opportunity to honor our country’s second Independence Day and reflect on our shared history and future. 
“The origins of Juneteenth date to June 1865. Even though the Emancipation Proclamation was signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863 and the Confederate army surrendered to the Union army in April 1865, enslaved people in Texas — the westernmost Confederate state — could not exercise their freedom until June 19, 1865. ‘On that date, Union General Gordon Granger led some 2,000 Union troops, many of whom were Black, into Galveston Bay, where they announced that the more than 250,000 enslaved Black people in the state were free by executive decree. This day came to be known as ‘Juneteenth,’ deriving its name from combining ‘June’ and ‘nineteenth.’” 

Read More

https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistoryjune.htm#june19

Bob Bolus sues Scranton to get LGBTQ+ pride flag removed from City Hall

Bob Bolus sues Scranton to get LGBTQ+ pride flag removed from City Hall

Lawsuit also aims to prohibit rainbow-motif banner from display at any government building in Lackawanna County

The Pride flag outside of City Hall in Scranton on Monday, June 16, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)
The Pride flag outside of City Hall in Scranton on Monday, June 16, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)
Author

UPDATED: 

Bob Bolus refiled a lawsuit to get the pride flag, which is a symbol of support for LGBTQ+ people and inclusivity, removed from Scranton City Hall and barred from display at all government buildings in Lackawanna County.

The city has been flying a rainbow-motif pride flag on a flagpole at the municipal building at 340 N. Washington Ave. since June 1 for the annual commemoration of Pride Month.

Bolus initially filed a lawsuit June 6 in Lackawanna County Court on a pro-se basis, meaning representing himself without an attorney, in a legal attempt to compel the removal of the pride flag from City Hall, as well as having it barred from display there and at all government buildings in the county. Also on June 6, Lackawanna County Judge Terrence Nealon dismissed Bolus’ lawsuit on various procedural errors, including that he did not properly file or serve the action or name defendants. Nealon dismissed the case “without prejudice,” meaning Bolus could try to do it again properly.

The Pride flag outside of City Hall in Scranton on Monday, June 16, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)
The Pride flag outside of City Hall in Scranton on Monday, June 16, 2025. (REBECCA PARTICKA/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER)

On June 9, Bolus filed a new lawsuit in county court, again on a pro-se basis, and again seeking a court order requiring the removal of the pride flag from public display at Scranton City Hall and barring its display there and at “all public buildings within the jurisdiction of Lackawanna County.”

The new lawsuit names as defendants the city, Mayor Paige Gebhardt Cognetti and Scranton City Council members, who are council President Gerald Smurl, Bill King, Mark McAndrew, Jessica Rothchild and Tom Schuster, all individually and in their official capacities as municipal elected officials. The mayor and council members are all Democrats.

Bolus also named as a defendant, individually and in his official capacity, Lackawanna County Commissioner Bill Gaughan, who is a Democrat.

Bolus, who is a Republican, did not name Republican Lackawanna County Commissioner Chris Chermak as a defendant. In a phone interview Monday, Bolus said he named only Gaughan because he is the chairman of the commissioners.

Bob Bolus Sr. (COURTESY OF BOB BOLUS SR.)
Bob Bolus Sr. (COURTESY OF BOB BOLUS SR.)

Scranton City Solicitor Jessica Eskra declined to comment on the lawsuit, saying the city would respond in court.

Lackawanna County Solicitor Donald Frederickson said in a statement, “Mr. Bolus’ frivolous action has been denied by the court on its own motion,” and thus Frederickson believes Bolus would have to ask the court for reconsideration to refile.

Some of the claims in Bolus’ lawsuit include:

• Scranton City Council, the mayor and Lackawanna County commissioners “are responsible for the decision to raise and display the Pride Flag at Scranton City Hall.”

• Title 16, Chapter 161 Section 27 of state law regarding display of municipal flags on county buildings says: “It shall be lawful to display the flag of any county, city, borough or other municipality in the Commonwealth or the official POW/MIA flag on the public buildings or grounds of any county;” and thus the state does not specifically authorize the display of a pride flag on public grounds.

• The pride flag is a “catalyst” for political and social division; and it is not inclusive “as it does not represent” all citizens of the city or county.

• The pride flag has become a political symbol associated with the Democratic Party; as well as “a symbol of sexual orientation, sexual practices and a sexual lifestyle” that is “abhorrent to a significant number of people due to religious and personal beliefs;” and it is not neutral or appropriate for display on public buildings.

The filing and refiling of the lawsuit comes amid controversy aired at recent city council meetings.

On June 10, Smurl apologized for not stopping derogatory remarks made during public comment at the June 3 weekly council meeting. The apology was a response to comments by Bolus made June 3 opposing having the rainbow flag displayed at City Hall, as well as other remarks that Bolus directed at a pro-LGBTQ+ resident Angela Ramone. Residents also came out to council’s June 10 meeting to express support for LGBTQ+ people and condemn hate speech, while Bolus said, “I make no excuse for last week,” according to an Electric City Television simulcast and video of the weekly meeting posted online.

Originally Published: 

“A Glimmer Of Hope.”

It’s Still PRIDE Month! Here’s Peace & Justice History for 6/18. Now Have Some Big Fun!

June 18, 1571
King Sebastian of Portugal enacted penalties for violation of censorship legislation. The fines could be as much as a quarter or half of the violator’s legal possessions, plus the threat of exile to Brazil or an African colony. Death sentences were also not uncommon. Seized books were burned and burnings were supervised by Roman Catholic priests.
June 18, 1840
The Oberlin Non-Resistance Society was formed at the Ohio college by students who believed “that the Gospel of Jesus Christ inculcates the duty of peace and good-will.” They were inspired by abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison’s New England group of similar name.
They rejected all use of violence even in the name of duty to country. “We must submit to the ‘powers that be,’ and ‘obey magistrates,’ except when their requirements conflict with God’s laws; when we are meekly to endure the penalty of disobedience ‘threatening them not.’ ”
Though denounced by the faculty and ignored by the student newspaper, the group was among the first in a succession of peace- and justice-oriented organizations begun at Oberlin.

Oberlin’s peaceful tradition 
June 18, 1941
Less than two weeks before a scheduled march on Washington, its chief organizer, (Asa) A. Philip Randolph, was invited to the White House by President Franklin Roosevelt. Randolph was the president of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, the first successful black trade union. He, along with activist and singer Bayard Rustin, had issued a “Call to Negro America to March on Washington for Jobs and Equal Participation in National Defense on July 1, 1941.”

Roosevelt was wary of the prospect of such a demonstration and desirous of developing support for a war effort. Randolph told Roosevelt he would abandon the march plans only if the president would stop job discrimination in both the defense industry and the government. Before the end of the month, Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8802, which barred government contractors from discriminating in hiring on the basis of race, color, creed or national origin.

A. Philip Randolph and Eleanor Roosevelt
The order, sometimes called a second emancipation proclamation, was the federal government’s most significant action on behalf of the rights of African Americans since post-Civil War reconstruction of the 1870s.
June 18, 1948
A United Nations commission approved and recommended to the General Assembly an International Declaration of Human Rights, recognizing that “the inherent dignity and . . . the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world . . . .”
Text of the Declaration:  . . .
June 18, 1970
The U.S. Congress passed the 26th amendment to the constitution, lowering the voting age to 18 for all elections—federal, state and local. The amendment went into effect just 100 days later after 38 state legislatures had ratified the amendment.
June 18, 1979
SALT II (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty), an agreement to put limits on both America’s and the Soviet Union’s long-range missiles and bombers, was signed by Presidents Jimmy Carter and Leonid Brezhnev. This was the first arms-reduction treaty between the two superpowers. It was signed despite the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan the previous year.

Read more on SALT II’s control of weapons of mass destruction 

https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistoryjune.htm#june18

Some The Majority Report clips on war, right wing violence, and on the gerontocracy issue in politics.

 

They want you to give them a reason… don’t. Be safe out there.

The realty we have today.  The thugs are looking for ways to make this 1930s Germany.   Best wishes.  Hugs

Federal prosecutors now charging immigrants who don’t submit fingerprints under dormant 1940s law

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/14/trump-administration-alien-registration-act-00403535

The Alien Registration Act requires non-citizens to register with the federal government. That provision hadn’t been enforced in 75 years.

Demonstrators protest against ICE and the Trump administration on June 9 in Louisville, Kentucky.

Federal officials have begun carrying out President Donald Trump’s orders to enforce a World War II-era criminal law that requires virtually all non-citizens in the country to register with and submit fingerprints to the government.

Since April, law enforcement in Louisiana, Arizona, Montana, Alabama, Texas and Washington, D.C., have charged people with willful “failure to register” under the Alien Registration Act, an offense most career federal public defenders have never encountered before. Many of those charged were already in jail and in ongoing deportation proceedings when prosecutors presented judges with the new charges against them.

The registration provision in the law, which was passed in 1940 amid widespread public fear about immigrants’ loyalty to the U.S., had been dormant for 75 years, but it is still on the books. Failure to register is considered a “petty offense” — a misdemeanor with maximum penalties of six months imprisonment or a $1,000 fine.

In reviving the law, the Trump administration may put undocumented immigrants in a catch-22. If they register, they must hand over detailed, incriminating information to the federal government — including how and when they entered the country. But knowingly refusing to register is also a crime, punishable by arrest or prosecution, on top of the ever-present threat of deportation.

“The sort of obvious reason to bring back registration in the first place is the hope that people will register, and therefore give themselves up effectively to the government because they already confessed illegal entry,” said Jonathan Weinberg, a Wayne State University law professor who has studied the registration law.

But the Trump administration also has another goal. It says one purpose of the registration regime is to provoke undocumented immigrants to choose a third option: leave the country voluntarily, or, in the words of the Department of Homeland Security, compulsory “mass self-deportation.” Those efforts, alongside the administration’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act and a more aggressive approach to immigration raids, are meant to achieve a broader, overarching campaign promise: the largest deportation program in the history of America.

“For decades, this law has been ignored — not anymore,” the department said in a February announcement that it would enforce the law. The department called “mass self-deportation” a “safer path for aliens and law enforcement,” and said it saves U.S. taxpayer dollars.

The Department of Homeland Security did not answer questions about its enforcement policies.

A long dormant law will now affect millions

The Alien Registration Act was passed in 1940, amid fears about immigrants’ loyalties. A separate provision of the statute criminalizes advocacy for overthrowing the government. For about two decades, that provision was used to prosecute people who were accused of being either pro-fascist or pro-Communist.

The registration provision, though, remained largely dormant, and had not been enforced in 75 years. It applies to non-citizens, regardless of legal status, who are in the U.S. for 30 days or longer.

Certain categories of legal immigrants have already met the requirement. Immigrants who have filed applications to become permanent residents are considered registered by DHS, for example. And even some undocumented U.S. residents are already registered: U.S. residents who have received “parole” — a form of humanitarian protection from deportation — are also considered registered.

Still, DHS estimates that up to 3.2 million immigrants are currently unregistered and are affected by the new enforcement regime. The administration has created a new seven-page form that non-citizens must use. The form requires people, under penalty of perjury, to provide biographical details, contact information, details about any criminal history and the circumstances of how they entered the U.S.

After DHS issued regulations to enforce the registration requirement in April, the administration announced that 47,000 undocumented immigrants had registered using the new form.

A legal challenge and a series of prosecutions

The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and other advocacy groups filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s move to revive the registration requirement in March.

U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, initially expressed skepticism toward the administration, saying in a recent hearing that officials had pulled a “big switcheroo” on undocumented immigrants. But McFadden in April refused the plaintiffs’ request to temporarily block the policy, saying the Coalition likely lacks the legal standing to sue because it has not shown that it would be harmed by the policy. The group has appealed McFadden’s decision.

In the meantime, the administration has begun to prosecute people for failure to register for the first time in seven decades.

The prosecutions so far have stumbled.

On May 19, a federal magistrate judge in Louisiana consolidated and dismissed five of the criminal cases, saying prosecutors had no probable cause to believe the defendants had intentionally refused to register.

Judge Michael North wrote that the Alien Registration Act requires “some level of subjective knowledge or bad intent” behind the choice not to register. The prosecutions, the judge wrote, are impermissible because most people are simply unaware of the law, and the government “did not provide these Defendants — as well as millions of similarly situated individuals here without government permission — with a way to register” since 1950.

But North also pointed out that the government may have an easier path to proving probable cause in the future, given that DHS created a new registration form in April. And government attorneys have appealed the five dismissed cases.

The Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana declined to comment on recent charges filed under the law.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia said the office “is aggressively pursuing criminals in the district and will use all criminal justice resources available to make D.C. safe and to carry out President Trump’s and Attorney General Bondi’s direction to support immigration enforcement.”

The other federal district attorneys whose offices filed charges did not respond to a request for comment.

Michelle LaPointe, legal director at the American Immigration Council, an immigrants’ rights advocacy group, said these initial cases are the “tip of the iceberg.” LaPointe is among the attorneys representing the Coalition in its lawsuit against the administration.

“I don’t expect them to abate just because there were some dismissals,” LaPointe said, pointing to North’s statements about future charges. “They have already stated that they intend to make prosecution of the few immigration-related criminal statutes a priority for DOJ, and it’s very easy for them to at least charge, even if they’re not always gonna be able to sustain their burden to secure a conviction.”

Weinberg, the Wayne State law professor, agreed that the administration will likely continue attempting broad enforcement.

“If they bring a whole lot of prosecutions and end up losing all, they may step back,” Weinberg said. “If they bring a whole lot and win a few, they’ll say, ‘Well, that’s the basis on which we can move further’” and appeal — potentially all the way to the Supreme Court, he noted.

Interesting Bit About Socials

Social Media Are Now a DIY Alert System for ICE Raids

The undocumented migrant community in the United States is using social networks and other digital platforms to send alerts about raids and the presence of immigration agents around the US.

The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (Chirla) estimates that in recent days, around 300 migrants have been detained in California as part of raids carried out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in compliance with an order issued by the Trump administration.

This figure is based on collaborative reports compiled by the Rapid Response Network, an alliance comprised of dozens of organizations that provide support to migrants and disseminate information about immigration detentions and operations.

Angelica Salas, director of Chirla, described the raids as a phenomenon “never seen before” in the three decades she has been defending migrant communities, according to statements reported by The Los Angeles Times.

Jorge Mario Cabrera, spokesman for the same organization, told the EFE news agency that most of the detainees are not criminals, “as the US government has tried to portray them.” He indicated that most of those arrested are workers from Los Angeles, although arrests have also been documented in other parts of the state.

In the midst of intense protests against Trump’s immigration policies, these operations are expected to continue in Los Angeles for at least 30 days, according to US representative Nanette Barragan, citing data provided by the White House. Likewise, an escalation of these actions is anticipated nationwide, after the administration announced its goal of making up to 3,000 arrests per day.

Several migrant-rights organizations have warned about possible violations of due process of people targeted by ICE. They have denounced ICE for restricting access to detainees on multiple occasions, which could limit their right to adequate legal representation.

Watching ICE

This situation has generated concern among the undocumented population, most of whom are of Hispanic origin, which has intensified the use of social networks to alert people about the presence of immigration agents in different regions of the US.

In a search conducted by the WIRED en Español team, several groups and pages were identified on digital platforms dedicated to receiving, verifying, and disseminating reports about ICE checkpoints, patrols, and raids. The origin of these profiles is diverse: Some are managed by well-known nongovernmental organizations and activist collectives, while others were created by private members of the migrant community.

redadas ICE

Alerts about operations are disseminated through direct messages, WhatsApp, or posts on each page’s feed. In turn, it is possible to anonymously report the presence of immigration agents through private text messages or calls to specific phone numbers.

In general, users are asked for basic data such as time, date, city, state, and exact location of the operation, as well as photographs or videos when it is possible to document them. In addition to issuing real-time alerts, many of these pages offer free legal guidance, not only on migration issues, but also on labor rights, access to health, education, and other key services.

Some of the networks active in this work include:

Union del Barrio California

This grassroots pro-immigrant organization maintains an active presence on Facebook. It conducts community patrols to detect ICE movement, shares urgent alerts, and organizes workshops on legal rights.

Chirla

With constant activity on Facebook and other platforms, Chirla publishes notifications about raids, provides legal advice, and calls for citizen mobilizations in the face of new raids.

Stop ICE Raids Alert Network

This network distributes emergency alerts and offers assistance to people affected by ICE raids. In addition to its social network accounts, it has a web page that allows people to receive geolocalized notifications in real time.

Siembra NC

This organization operates primarily in North Carolina. Through its Facebook page, it promotes a whistleblower hotline (336-543-0353). Although its focus is on Alamance, Durham, Forsyth, Guilford, Orange, Wake, Randolph, and Rockingham counties, it has a statewide presence across North Carolina.

RadarSafe

This project uses the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP), a system for sending out digital emergency alerts, to provide secure information on immigration stops and operations. It also publishes community-submitted reports and verifies information with support from local residents.

Inmigración y Visas

Focused on immigration issues, this portal offers a WhatsApp channel where users can report raids, exchange experiences, and receive advice. It also shares informative content on its Facebook page and website.

SignalSafe

Adding to this assistance network is SignalSafe, an application created by a team of anonymous developers that provides real-time alerts on ICE activity. Through collaborative reporting, the app maps sightings of federal agents and unidentified vehicles, allowing migrants to avoid potential checkpoints.

Since Trump’s return to the presidency, SignalSafe has gained widespread popularity. The tool allows the integration of various filters based on the user’s location, type of activity by immigration authorities, and time range.

This platform is fed by citizen reports, which are verified by a group of specialized moderators. The system is bilingual, with support for Spanish and English, and has advanced security protocols to help protect user privacy.

Key Access

Given the growing number of raids in the United States and the lack of certainty about the safety of those detained in these operations, examples such as the above show that some sectors of the citizenry seem to have taken an active role in digital spaces against the implementation of immigration policies.

In this context, the widespread use of social networks among the migrant community has turned these platforms into key tools within the resistance movement. According to data from the International Organization for Migration, by 2023, 64 percent of migrants in transit through Central America, Mexico, and the Dominican Republic—mostly bound for the United States—had access to a smartphone and internet connection during their journey. Of these, 47 percent of men and 35 percent of women used these devices to access social networks.

This story was originally published on WIRED en Español and has been translated from Spanish.

Far-right judges rules that it’s totally legal to harass LGBTQ+ employees

Right now the tRump people are arguing in court that the right of judges to invoke country wide injunctions should be stopped.   But they never held that view when republicans ran to this judge’s jurisdiction to stop and hinder every Biden executive order and law.  Instead they crowed about it.  However like the debt now that it is them in charge they don’t like what they used to stop Democratic Party initiatives.  Hugs

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/05/far-right-judges-rules-that-its-totally-legal-to-harass-lgbtq-employees/

Daniel VillarrealMay 19, 2025, 7:57 am EDT
Anti-LGBTQ+ Judge Matthew KacsmarykAnti-LGBTQ+ Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk | YouTube screenshot

Anti-LGBTQ+ federal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn’t protect LGBTQ+ people from workplace discrimination — it only protects them from discriminatory termination. Kacsmaryk’s ruling contradicts the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, a case that classified anti-LGBTQ+ workplace discrimination as a form of sex-based harassment prohibited by Title VII.

In the case, the state of Texas sued the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), claiming that the federal agency’s June 2021 guidance interpreting Title VII as prohibiting anti-LGBTQ+ workplace discrimination violated Texas’s “sovereign right” to establish governmental workplace policies dictating employee names, pronouns, dress codes, and facility usage as being based on a person’s sex assigned at birth (and not their gender identity).

The EEOC’s June 2021 guidance said that, to avoid illegally discriminating against LGBTQ+ people in the workplace, adherence to dress codes, use of personal pronouns, and access to gender-segregated facilities must be differentiated based on one’s gender identity and not their sex assigned at birth.

Texas said that the EEOC violated Texas’s free speech rights and Title VII’s sex-based protections by forcing the state’s Department of Agriculture (TDA) to base its workplace policies on gender identity instead of one’s sex assigned at birth. These particular TDA workplace policies were created by Sid Miller, a supporter of the current U.S. president who has said he’s “thrilled” by the ban on trans military members and has called trans identity a form of “leftist social experimentation.”

Texas sued the EEOC with the assistance of the Heritage Foundation, the right-wing think tank that constructed Project 2025, the very anti-LGBTQ+ blueprint for the current U.S. president’s second term in office.

Kacsmaryk agreed with the state of Texas, ruling that the TDA’s policies can legally ban transgender employees from using restrooms, pronouns, and dress codes that align with their gender identity. The TDA’s policies don’t constitute unequal treatment of trans employees, Kacsmaryk wrote, because they “equally” apply to everyone based on their sex assigned at birth, Truthout reported.

Kacsmaryk’s ruling altogether ignores trans identities in a manner consistent with the current president’s interpretation of federal anti-discrimination law. The president has signed executive orders directing all federal agencies, including the EEOC, to end all legal recognition of trans people’s gender identities and to, instead, only recognize a person’s “biological sex” as assigned at birth.

Kacsmaryk ordered the EEOC to remove all references to sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under Title VII from its June 2021 guidance.

In 2022, Kacsmaryk ruled against LGBTQ+ protections in Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act – a law that bans healthcare discrimination on the basis of sex. The two doctors who sued in that case were represented by former Trump advisor Stephen Miller’s America First Legal Foundation, a far-right public interest group that opposes pro-LGBTQ+ civil rights.

Republicans and Christian groups often file their lawsuits in his district because of his tendency to rule in their favor.

Before his 2019 Senate confirmation hearing, Kacsmaryk removed his byline from an article condemning transgender health care in the Texas Review of Law and Politics, a far-right publication that he led as a law student at the University of Texas.

Hiding his contribution to the article likely prevented public scrutiny and questions about the article and his ties to The First Liberty Institute, a Christian conservative legal group that has represented clients who refused to serve LGBTQ+ people based on religious beliefs.

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


Daniel Villarreal is a longtime, award-winning journalist and editor who has written for NBC News, Newsweek, Vox, Slate, Vice News, The Seattle Stranger, The Dallas Voice and numerous other LGBTQ+ publications. He has spoken at SXSW, Creating Change, Netroots Nation, GaymerX, and is a graduate of GLAAD’s Voices of Color program and of the Poynter Institute’s 2024 Power of Diverse Voices seminar. He is also the founder of QueerBomb Dallas, an annual non-corporate Pride event; CinéWilde, the nation’s longest running monthly LGBTQ film series. He is available for interviews and educational talks.

Utah study on trans youth care extremely inconvenient for politicians who ordered it

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/05/utah-study-on-trans-youth-care-extremely-inconvenient-for-politicians-who-ordered-it/

Madison PaulyMay 27, 2025, 3:00 pm EDT
Spencer Cox of Utah answers a question during a discussion about how our society can learn to disagree in a way that allows us to find solutions on Wednesday, Nov. 15, 2023.Spencer Cox of Utah answers a question during a discussion about how our society can learn to disagree in a way that allows us to find solutions on Wednesday, Nov. 15, 2023. | Logan Newell/The Coloradoan / USA TODAY NETWORK

This article first appeared on Mother Jones. It has been republished with the publication’s permission.

In 2022, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox was the rare Republican governor who seemed to truly care about the well-being of transgender kids. “I don’t understand what they are going through or why they feel the way they do. But I want them to live,” he wrote in a letter that year, explaining why he was vetoing a bill that would have banned four trans middle- and high schoolers in Utah from playing on sports teams with classmates who shared their gender identity. “All the research shows that even a little acceptance and connection can reduce suicidality significantly.”

Meanwhile, nationally, Republican politicians were making opposition to trans rights a core tenet of their platforms, filing hundreds of bills attacking trans kids at the doctor’s office, at school, and on the field. Early in the 2023 legislative session, Cox capitulated, signing a bill that placed an indefinite “moratorium” on doctors providing puberty blockers and hormone therapy to trans kids with gender dysphoria. The bill ordered the Utah health department to commission a systematic review of medical evidence around the treatments, with the goal of producing recommendations for the legislature on whether to lift the moratorium. “We sincerely hope that we can treat our transgender families with more love and respect as we work to better understand the science and consequences behind these procedures,” Cox said at the time.

Now, more than two years later, that review is here, and its conclusions unambiguously support gender-affirming medical care for trans youth. “The conventional wisdom among non-experts has long been that there are limited data” on gender-affirming pediatric care, the authors wrote. “However, results from our exhaustive literature searches have lead us to the opposite conclusion.”

The medical evidence review, published on Wednesday, was compiled over a two-year period by the Drug Regimen Review Center at the University of Utah. Unlike the federal government’s recent report on the same subject, which was produced in three months and criticized gender-affirming pediatric treatments, the names of the Utah report’s contributors are actually disclosed on the more than thousand-page document.

The authors write:

The consensus of the evidence supports that the treatments are effective in terms of mental health, psychosocial outcomes, and the induction of body
changes consistent with the affirmed gender in pediatric [gender dysphoria] patients. The evidence also supports that the treatments are safe in terms of changes to bone density, cardiovascular risk factors, metabolic changes, and cancer…

It is our expert opinion that policies to prevent access to and use of [gender-affirming hormone therapy] for treatment of [gender dysphoria] in pediatric patients cannot be justified based on the quantity or quality of medical science findings or concerns about potential regret in the future, and that high-quality guidelines are available to guide qualified providers in treating pediatric patients who meet diagnostic criteria.

In a second part of their review, the authors looked specifically at long-term outcomes of patients who started treatment for gender dysphoria as minors:

Overall, there were positive mental health and psychosocial functioning outcomes. While gender affirming treatment showed a possibly protective effect in prostate cancer in transgender men and breast cancer in transgender women, there was an increase in some specific types of benign brain tumors. There were increased mortality risks in both transgender men and women treated with hormonal therapy, but more so in transgender women. Increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS. Patients that were seen at the gender clinic before the age of 18 had a lower risk of suicide compared to those referred as an adult.

Submitted with the review was a set of recommendations—compiled by advisers from the state’s medical and professional licensing boards, the University of Utah, and a Utah non-profit hospital system—on steps the state legislature could take to ensure proper training among gender-affirming care providers, in the event it decides to lift the moratorium.

But according to the Salt Lake Tribune, legislators behind the ban are already dismissing the findings they asked for. In response to questions from the Tribune, Rep. Katy Hall, who co-sponsored the 2023 ban, issued a joint statement with fellow Republican state Rep. Bridger Bolinder, the chair of the legislature’s Health and Human Services Interim Committee, that dismissed the study’s findings. “We intend to keep the moratorium in place,” they told the Tribune. “Young kids and teenagers should not be making life-altering medical decisions based on weak evidence.”

Why ignore their own review? Polling, the legislators’ statement suggests. “Utah was right to lead on this issue, and the public agrees—polls show clear majority support both statewide and nationally,” Hall and Bolinder added in their statement. “Simply put, the science isn’t there, the risks are real, and the public is with us.”

 

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