WELKER: Your secretary of state says everyone who's here, citizens and non-citizens, deserve due process. Do you agree?TRUMP: I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I don't know.WELKER: Don't you need to uphold the Constitution?TRUMP: I don't know
In November, Dhillon appeared on Tucker Carlson’s podcast to recount “all the crimes committed by Kamala Harris.”
The DOJ is quietly gutting its voting rights department. They are reassigning top staff, dropping active cases, and have rewritten their mission to focus on “voter fraud” instead of voter suppression.https://t.co/D218kQRPg0
Trump’s tariffs aren’t just wrecking the economy and fueling inflation—they’re also failing at their one supposed goal: helping American manufacturing. pic.twitter.com/GgrkzXWKv9
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) May 6, 2025
A system-wide outage last Monday caused air traffic controllers to lose the ability to see, hear or talk to all arriving and departing aircraft for 60 to 90 seconds at Newark Liberty Airport. @MattRiversABC reports. https://t.co/UWI0blu3tYpic.twitter.com/W2KpuEMfMX
BREAKING: The Supreme Court halts a district court injunction that had blocked Trump's ban on transgender military service. SCOTUS is clearing the way for Trump to enforce his purge of transgender troops. All three liberals dissent. http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25…
BREAKING: Another $70 million F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jet from the USS Harry S. Truman has been lost in the Red Sea—the second jet from the carrier lost in just over a week. -CNN pic.twitter.com/s5QrPYPo7O
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) May 7, 2025
Another Navy fighter jet sank to the bottom of the Red Sea on Tuesday following the second such mishap aboard the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier in just over a week, a U.S. official told ABC News.
Hageman: I think another reason we should change the name to The Gulf of America is for over 40 years, Mexico has been dumping raw sewage in the area near San Diego… That’s another reason we need to retake and claim ownership of this area pic.twitter.com/7VKXsYBHVH
NEW: The U.S. is ramping up its intelligence-gathering efforts in Greenland, deploying its spy apparatus to support Donald Trump’s campaign to take control of the island. -WSJ
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The Democratic controlled cities of Salt Lake City and Boise adopted new city flags this week showing support for LGBTQ+ people in defiance of their states’ Republican-controlled Legislatures, which have banned traditional rainbow pride flags at schools and government buildings.
The newly adopted city flags are displayed at the Salt Lake City and County building showing support for LGBTQ+ in defiance of their state’s Republican controlled Legislature, Wednesday, May 7, 2025, in Salt Lake City. (AP Photo/Melissa Majchrzak)
Utah’s capital of Salt Lake City created new flag designs while Boise, the capital of Idaho, made the traditional pride flag one of its official city flags. The move in Utah came hours before a ban on unsanctioned flag displays took effect Wednesday.
The cities’ mayors spoke Tuesday morning to discuss their individual plans and offer each other support, said Andrew Wittenberg, a spokesperson for Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall’s office.
Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall smiles as she attends the IOC session in Paris, July 24, 2024. (AP Photo/David Goldman, File)Mayor Lauren McLean listens during a news conference at the Linen Building in Boise, Idaho, June 26, 2024. (AP Photo/Kyle Green, File)
The final years of Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership were dominated by debate around the passing of her gender recognition legislation. Photograph: Stuart Wallace/Rex/Shutterstock
The lives of transgender people in the UK are at risk of being made “unliveable”, Nicola Sturgeon has said in her first public comments about the supreme court ruling on the legal definition of a woman, which was prompted by legislation she oversaw in the Scottish parliament.
The UK supreme court ruled that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act referred only to a biological woman and to biological sex. This was the conclusion of a long-running court action by the gender critical campaign group For Women Scotland, who objected to a law passed at Holyrood aimed at improving women’s representation on public boards being extended to transgender women.
Sturgeon said the supreme court’s ruling – “by very definition … the law of the land” – could not be questioned but expressed profound concerns about interim advice published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission amounting to a blanket ban on trans people using toilets and other services of the gender they identify as.
“The question for me, and I think for a lot of people, is how that is now translated into practice; can that be done in a way that, of course, protects women, but also allows trans people to live their lives with dignity and in a safe and accepted way.
“I would be very concerned if that interim guidance became the final guidance and I hope that is not the case because I think that potentially makes the lives of trans people almost unliveable.
“It certainly doesn’t make a single woman any safer to do that because the threat to women comes from predatory and abusive men.”
The former first minister and SNP leader added that it was not inevitable that the judgment would make the lives of transgender people “impossibly difficult”, but there was a danger that certain interpretations could put transgender rights at risk.
“If that is the case, then yes, it would be my view that the law as it stands needs to be looked at,” she told reporters at the Scottish parliament on Tuesday.
Sturgeon has been a staunch advocate of transgender rights, and the final years of her premiership were dominated by the increasingly toxic and polarised debate around the passing of her flagship gender recognition reforms in late 2022.
The bill, which was passed with cross-party support at Holyrood, made it easier and less intrusive for individuals to legally change their gender, extending the new system of self-identification to 16- and 17-year-olds for the first time. But it was immediately blocked by the Rishi Sunak’s UK government as cutting across the UK-wide Equality Act.
After this unprecedented veto, Sturgeon accused some opponents of the bill of using women’s rights as a “cloak of acceptability to cover up what is transphobia”, telling the NewsAgents podcast that some critics of the legislation were also “deeply misogynist, often homophobic, possibly some of them racist as well”.
On Tuesday Sturgeon rejected the suggestion made by many of her critics that she owed them an apology after the ruling.
“I fundamentally, and respectfully, disagree,” she said. “I recognise the different views on this, I’ve always recognised the different views on this, but I think its important that respect runs in both directions.”
But co-director of For Women Scotland, Susan Smith, said Sturgeon’s claim that life would be made “unliveable” was “frankly wrong and quite disturbing”. Smith told BBC Scotland News that single-sex spaces were needed to provide women with “privacy, dignity, safety at time when they’re vulnerable”.
In the full, unedited version of Donald Trump’s recent Meet the Press interview with Kristen Welker—released online by NBC but not aired in full during the broadcast—Trump made several striking remarks that were omitted from the televised segment.
Trump on Meet the Press
Meet the Press
One such moment came when Trump claimed credit for getting Amazon founder Jeff Bezos to remove tariff impact notices from the platform. “I asked him about it and he said I don’t want to do that and he took it off immediately,” Trump said, calling Bezos “a very nice guy” and suggesting a friendly relationship between the two.
Welker: What did you say to Jeff Bezos?
Trump: He’s just a very nice guy. We have a relationship. I asked him about it and he said I don’t want to do that and he took it off immediately. pic.twitter.com/lE4xtTC4lo
The removal of such notices undermines public transparency by severing the direct link between rising consumer prices and Trump’s tariff policies.
Other remarks that were cut from the interview that aired included Trump’s insistence that prices for eggs “were down 87%” under his administration, citing White House Easter egg hunts as anecdotal proof, despite Welker reminding him the price spike was caused by a bird flu outbreak.
Trump: Eggs.. you were the one who asked me. It was the first week. I didn’t even know what you were talking about. Egg prices were so high you couldn’t buy eggs. They didn’t have any eggs.. We had Easter at the WH and we had thousands of eggs and they were down 87%.
Trump also returned to debunked claims about the 2020 election, asserting the results were “rigged” and insisting he “won a lot of court cases” despite losing the vast majority.
Trump: The election was rigged…
Welker: I don’t want to look back. You took your case to court about your allegations..
Trump: There’s no question. The election was rigged. The facts are in and it’s still being litigated.
He went further to suggest that “China is eating the tariffs” rather than U.S. consumers or businesses. That is not the reality.
Trump: What people don’t understand is.. the country eats the tariff, the company eats the tariff and it’s not passed along at all… China is eating the tariffs pic.twitter.com/oC30AQokR0
These unaired statements raise questions about editorial choices in broadcast journalism, especially as Trump continues to air grievances about 60 Minutes for what he claims was an unfairly edited interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. While time constraints are common in televised interviews, withholding full conversations—especially those containing controversial or revealing statements—can fuel partisan claims of media bias.
Releasing full interviews, as MSNBC ultimately did, could help restore public trust and offer a more complete view of political figures’ positions.
Hackers say they have obtained what they say are passenger lists for GlobalX flights from January to this month. The data appear to include people who have been deported.
Hackers have targeted GlobalX Air, one of the main airlines the Trump administration is using as part of its deportation efforts, and stolen what they say are flight records and passenger manifests of all of its flights, including those for deportation, 404 Media has learned.
The data, which the hackers contacted 404 Media and other journalists about unprompted, could provide granular insight into who exactly has been deported on GlobalX flights, when, and to where, with GlobalX being the charter company that facilitated the deportation of hundreds of Venezuelans to El Salvador.
“Anonymous has decided to enforce the Judge’s order since you and your sycophant staff ignore lawful orders that go against your fascist plans,” a defacement message posted to GlobalX’s website reads. Anonymous, well-known for its use of the Guy Fawkes mask, is an umbrella some hackers operate under when performing what they see as hacktivism.
The hacker says the data includes flight records and passenger lists. The hacker sent 404 Media a copy of the data, which is sorted into folders dated everyday from January 19 through May 1.
404 Media cross-checked known information about ICE deportation flights that come from official and confirmable sources with information contained on the flight manifests and flight details obtained by the hacker. Information about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s flight is in the hacked data.
For example, the hackers obtained what appears to be detailed flight information about GlobalX flights 6143, 6145, and 6122 that left from Harlingen, Texas’s Valley International Airport on March 15. These flights are at the center of a class-action lawsuit filed by five pseudonymous Venezuelan men against the Trump administration (which eventually went to the Supreme Court) and which took off during and immediately following a court proceeding in which their lawyers were trying to get a restraining order to prevent the flights from taking off.
During a District Court proceeding in Washington D.C., the federal government argued that it had no flight information to share with the court: “the Government surprisingly represented that it still had no flight details to share,” during the hearing, the judge’s opinion in that case reads. “When pressed, Government counsel stated that the ‘operational details’ he had learned during the recess ‘raised potential national security issues,’ so they could not be shared while the public and press listened.”
Image: A screenshot of the defacement.
“Although the Government has refused to provide the particular details, all evidence suggests that during the short window that the Court was adjourned, two removal flights took off from Harlingen—one around 5:25 pm and the other at about 5:45 pm,” court records say, noting that these were GlobalX flights 6143 and 6145; a third referenced flight left immediately following the hearing. These details closely match the timing of the flights and other details in the hacked data.
Also included in the data is a record mentioning the name Heymar Padilla Moyetones, a 24-year-old woman who was flown from Texas to Honduras, then from Honduras to El Salvador by mistake, and then was returned to Texas. The data obtained by the hackers says that GlobalX flew her from Valley International Airport in Texas to Honduras on March 15 on Flight 6143, then was flown from Comayagua International Airport in Honduras to El Salvador International on flight 6144 later that day. She then was flown directly from El Salvador International back to Valley International Airport in Texas on March 15. The information in the hacked data lines up with what Moyetones told NBC.
404 Media was also able to cross-check the names on larger published lists of people who have previously been reported to be deported, finding their names in the hacked data with the specific flights that they were purportedly on.
404 Media is not publishing the full list of passengers at this time as we work to verify which passengers were specifically on deportation flights and to protect peoples’ privacy because the manifests contain personally sensitive information like passport details. We will continue to analyze the data for information in the public interest and explore what we’re able to publish.
Neither GlobalX nor ICE responded to requests for comment.
The Trump administration contracts with a company called CSI Aviation as part of its deportation flights. On February 28, ICE posted a notice saying it would award $128 million to the company for its work. In turn, CSI Aviation subcontracts some of its work to GlobalX, which said it expects to make $65 million per year from the deal. In 2024, 74 percent of ICE’s more than 1,500 removal flights were on GlobalX plans, the Project on Government Oversight reported in March.
ProPublica previously reported on what it is like for flight attendants working on GlobalX, also known as Global Crossing Airlines. Sources in that piece said they were worried what would happen in an emergency, in part because the passengers were shackled.
“They never taught us anything regarding the immigration flights,” ProPublica quoted one flight attendant as saying. “They didn’t tell us these people were going to be shackled, wrists to fucking ankles.”
The hacker told 404 Media they managed to find a token belonging to a GlobalX developer. They then used that to find access and secret keys for GlobalX’s AWS instances which contained the data. They said they also sent a copy of the defacement message to GlobalX’s employees, and then deleted company data. 404 Media does not know the identity of the hacker, and the hacker said they sent the data to other journalists
The hacker said they also sent the message to GlobalX pilots and crew members through the company’s NAVBLUE account. NAVBLUE is a flight operations platform made by Airbus which pilots use for flight planning, among other things.
404 Media was unable to verify whether pilots or crew members received this message. But the hacker provided screenshots which appear to show them logged into the platform. They also provided a screenshot purporting to show access to GlobalX’s GitHub.
The website defacement quotes a May 1 ruling from US District Judge Fernando Rodriguez which said that the president unlawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act and blocked the administration from deporting more alleged Venezuelan gang members without due process.
The defacement adds: “You lose again Donnie.” (snip)
I think the tide is turning and the superexpressive attacks on the LGBTQ+ people, both adults and kids is not working well for republicans. I think they will see at local levels people are not buying it and are working to stop efforts to wipe all mention of LGBTQ+ people from society. Hugs
‘This is more than a policy victory,’ Equality Florida said.
LGBTQ advocates are celebrating several bills — including one that could have banned Pride flags flown at government buildings — stalling out this Session.
“Once again, we’ve done what many thought was impossible: not one anti-LGBTQ bill passed this session,” Equality Florida’s Executive Director Nadine Smith said in a statement Saturday.
The Legislative Session ended Friday although lawmakers failed to pass a balanced budget.
Some of the dead bills including HB 75/SB 100 that would have banned government buildings, schools and universities, from flying flags that represented a “political viewpoint.”
The proposal was sponsored by outgoing state Sen. Randy Fine before he left for Washington, D.C.
“How would we feel if the city of Palm Bay or the city of Ormond Beach flew the Make America Great Again flag from City Hall? How would we feel if a teacher hung that in their classroom?” Fine said during a March committee hearing. “The idea is whether it’s political viewpoints that we agree with or we disagree with, let’s keep that stuff out of government buildings.”
Equity Florida lobbied against the bill with its public policy director Jon Harris Maurer calling the flag ban “unnecessary, unclear, unconstitutional and dangerous.”
“It does not help Floridians struggling with insurance and housing affordability,” he said. “Instead, it is a made-up solution to a culture war for political purposes, but it will have real harms.”
Ultimately, Fine’s bill was withdrawn, failing to reach the Senate floor.
Equity Florida also heralded the defeat of other bills, including HB 1495/SB 440 to prevent governments from using the preferred pronouns for people who are transgender and other bills targeting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI.)
The organization pointed to its grassroots campaign this Session with 400 LGBTQ activists lobbying during “our largest largest advocacy week ever,” 16,000 emails sent to lawmakers and about 325 in-person meetings with legislators.
“It’s students and seniors, faith leaders and frontline workers, parents and teachers, standing together and making sure lawmakers hear us loud and clear: we will not back down,” Smith said in a statement.
Gabrielle Russon
Gabrielle Russon is an award-winning journalist based in Orlando. She covered the business of theme parks for the Orlando Sentinel. Her previous newspaper stops include the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Toledo Blade, Kalamazoo Gazette and Elkhart Truth as well as an internship covering the nation’s capital for the Chicago Tribune. For fun, she runs marathons. She gets her training from chasing a toddler around. Contact her at gabriellerusson@gmail.com or on Twitter @GabrielleRusson
A think tank founded by Stephen Miller sued Roberts and the office that administers the judiciary, claiming that the White House should run the federal courts.
WASHINGTON, DC – MARCH 04: U.S. President Donald Trump (L) greets Chief Justice of the United States John G. Roberts, Jr as he arrives to deliver an address to a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on March 04, 2025 in Washington, DC. President Trump was expected to address Congress on his early achievements of his presidency and his upcoming legislative agenda. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)LESS
Close allies of President Trump are asking a judge to give the White House control over much of the federal court system.
In a little-noticed lawsuit filed last week, the America First Legal Foundation sued Chief Justice John Roberts and the head of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts.
The case ostensibly proceeds as a FOIA lawsuit, with the Trump-aligned group seeking access to judiciary records. But, in doing so, it asks the courts to cede massive power to the White House: the bodies that make court policy and manage the judiciary’s day-to-day operations should be considered independent agencies of the executive branch, the suit argues, giving the President, under the conservative legal movement’s theories, the power to appoint and dismiss people in key roles.
Multiple legal scholars and attorneys TPM spoke with reacted to the suit with a mixture of dismay, disdain and laughter. Though the core legal claim is invalid, they said, the suit seems to be a part of the fight that the administration launched and has continued to escalate against the courts over the past several months: ignoring a Supreme Court order to facilitate the return of a wrongly removed Salvadoran man, providing minimal notice to people subject to the Alien Enemies Act, flaunting an aggressive criminal case against a state court judge.
The executive branch has tried to encroach on the power of the judiciary in other ways too, prompting a degree of consternation and alarm unusual for the normally-staid Administrative Office of U.S. Courts. As TPM has documented, DOGE has already caused disorder at the courts and sent out mass emails to judges and other judiciary employees demanding a list of their recent accomplishments. Per one recent report in the New York Times, federal judges have expressed concern that Trump could direct the U.S. Marshals Service — an executive branch agency tasked with protecting judges and carrying out court orders — to withdraw protection.
These are all facets of an escalating campaign to erode the independence of the judiciary, experts told TPM. The lawsuit demonstrates another prong of it: close allies of the president are effectively asking the courts to rule that they should be managed by the White House.
“It’s like using an invalid legal claim to taunt the judiciary,” Anne Joseph O’Connell, a professor at Stanford University Law School, told TPM.
“To the extent this lawsuit has any value other than clickbait, maybe the underlying message is, we will let our imaginations run wild,” Peter M. Shane, a constitutional law scholar at NYU Law School, told TPM. “The Trump administration and the MAGA community will let our imaginations run wild in our attempts to figure out ways to make the life of the judiciary miserable, to the extent you push back against Trump.”
A FOIA from America First
The America First Legal Foundation filed the suit on April 22.
It came after the group first filed a FOIA request in July 2024 to the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts asking for “all records referring or relating to (1) Clarence Thomas or (2) Samuel Alito” and all communications with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA), starting in April 2023. Both Democrats have led investigations into the influence of wealthy political donors’ money on the court, the conservative legal movement’s long-term plan to capture the high court, and alleged ethical violations by Justices Thomas and Alito. The Judicial Conference, which is composed of senior federal judges and operates via an array of committees, sets policy for the judiciary.
Ethan V. Torrey, legal counsel of the Supreme Court, rejected the request in a September 2024 letter, per an exhibit filed along with the complaint.
Daniel Z. Epstein filed the FOIA request, and is listed as lead attorney on the lawsuit. Epstein currently represents President Trump in his personal capacity in the lawsuit against CBS over an October 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris.
Stephen Miller, the longtime Trump aide, founded the America First Legal Foundation in April 2021, describing it as the “long-awaited answer to the ACLU.” Over the next few years, the group succeeded in slowing down or blocking several Biden administration policies, often by filing in the Northern District of Texas’s Amarillo courthouse, which is presided over by a judge who is notably receptive to conservative arguments. Its priorities often match those of Trump’s second term; it attacked diversity programs, protections for LGBT students, immigration, and supposed “wokeness” in corporate America. Miller himself has been a public driving force in the most aggressive and lawless elements of the second Trump administration’s effort to bulldoze through civil liberties in the name of increasing the tempo of deportations.
In an email after publication, an America First Legal spokesperson cited a 1991 9th Circuit decision in a case brought by a federal judge seeking to force the Administrative Office to pay for a private defense attorney he wanted to hire in a lawsuit brought over his work as a judge. In that ruling, the 9th Circuit found that AO was a “non-Article III adjunct,” akin to a magistrate judge or special master: a body that serves the courts, but is not a court itself. America First Legal didn’t immediately reply to a follow-up question from TPM about whether it could address its claim that the Judicial Conference is also an independent agency of the executive branch.
When the suit was filed in April, it received a small round of coverage that focused on FOIA element of the claim.
Legal experts suggested to TPM that the FOIA piece is something of a trojan horse. The Judicial Conference and Administrative Office’s denial of the FOIA request provides standing to sue, and thereby ask a federal judge to declare that the two judicial bodies “are subject to the FOIA as independent agencies within the executive branch.”
In terms of importance, a judge finding that core parts of the judiciary are independent agencies of the executive branch would dwarf any FOIA material America First Legal might receive. The lawsuit itself seems to acknowledge this. At one point, in language channeling that of a protection racket, America First Legal observes that “Federal courts rely on the executive branch for facility management and security. Federal judges, as officers of the courts, need resources to fulfill their constitutional obligations.”
New extreme for an old theory
There is a level of irony here.
For years, conservative legal scholars have pushed the idea that power in the executive is unitary, granting the President the ability to exert direct control over all federal officials who carry out federal law. It opens the door to a level of presidential power that hasn’t been seen until this administration, and which the Supreme Court may ratify this term.
This lawsuit asks the judiciary to extend that logic to its own operations, potentially dealing a fatal blow to judicial independence.
This argument reaches a provocative peak when it comes to the Judicial Conference of the United States. There, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court can appoint members to committees. The lawsuit says that this means Roberts may, at times, fall under the President’s power — for FOIA purposes, of course.
“Accordingly, if the Chief Justice does indeed have this power to appoint officers, then he must be acting as an agency head, subjecting the Judicial Conference to the FOIA,” the suit reads.
Melissa Murray, a professor at NYU Law, pointed out that the suit raises a number of bizarre scenarios. If it makes it to the Supreme Court, “does the Chief Justice have to recuse himself?” she asked.
“It does seem like poking the bear,” she added.
As of this writing, lawyers for Roberts and the U.S. Courts director have not appeared on the docket. In other cases filed against parts of the judiciary, the Justice Department’s Civil Division has appointed attorneys.
The DOJ did not return a request for comment. The Administrative Office of U.S. Courts declined to comment. The Supreme Court also did not return requests for comment.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that federal courthouses will soon start serving Trump steaks, or that Kid Rock will be called on to provide filler sound during sidebar sessions.
Blake Emerson, a professor at UCLA Law, called the suit’s claims “outlandish,” and said that if it somehow succeeded, it would grant the White House control over “the means by which the judicial branch functionally operates.”
O’Connell, the Stanford Law Professor, described it to TPM as more of an attempt to tell a story about “how much power they think the executive should have” than a serious legal claim.
“There is no chance that this will prevail,” she said.
Musk gave Trump $290 million. The quid pro quo? Deregulation.
– The NLRB dropped union-busting charges against SpaceX – The EPA backed off fines for environmental violations – The FAA continues approving launches despite rocket explosions – The FCC is giving Starlink favorable… pic.twitter.com/jH64dF6m1c
Students are shown at Carl Wunsche Sr. High School, 900 Wunsche Loop, Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2025, in Spring.
Melissa Phillip/Staff Photographer
A lawmaker pushing to ban non-human behavior in schools says he based his bill on a conversation with a school administrator, who has since denied so-called furries are a problem in her district.
During an at-times tense hearing Tuesday night, Republican state Rep. Stan Gerdes said he filed the bill after hearing “reports of the presence of a furry” in a Smithville school. He said he called the district superintendent in November, who told him “this is happening in districts across the state” and schools don’t have the ability to stop it.
“We just want to help them have the tools to get some of the distractions out of the classroom so we can get back to teaching time,” Gerdes told the House Public Education Committee.
But the Smithville school district issued a public statement last month disputing Gerdes’ claims. It said Superintendent Cheryl Burns told Gerdes there were no litter boxes on campus for use by students dressed as cats, but as a courtesy to the lawmaker, she “made the extra effort to walk the campus to confirm.”
“At this time, the District has no concerns related to students behaving as anything but typical children,” the statement said.
Still, Gerdes argued the legislation was needed to curb the “extremely concerning” trend while providing scant evidence furries are a problem, or even present, in Texas schools.
Both Gov. Greg Abbott and House Speaker Dustin Burrows have backed the “Forbidding Unlawful Representation of Roleplaying in Education (F.U.R.R.I.E.S) Act,” which would prohibit any “non-human behavior” by a student, including wearing animal ears or barking, meowing or hissing.
The bill includes exceptions for sports mascots or kids in school plays and would only apply to grades 6-12. Still, it includes a clause that would amend the family code to deem schools “allowing or encouraging” a child to “develop a dependence on or a belief that non-human behaviors are societally acceptable” as child abuse.
The furries trend has existed for years, at least among adults. Many like taking on animal personas, dressing up in costumes and attending gatherings. The annual Anthrocon convention in Pittsburgh draws thousands.
Rumors about classrooms adapting to child furries appeared to start online in 2022. School districts in Iowa, Michigan and Nebraska later debunked claims they were providing litter boxes in bathrooms, and the fact-checking team at PolitiFact could not find any credible news reports that supported the claim.
Under questioning from a Democrat on the panel, who cast the bill as part of a “smear campaign” against public schools, Gerdes could not point to a single example of a school providing litter boxes to students.
Gerdes, a two-term legislator and past aide to former Gov. Rick Perry, said his office has received “some reports of them.”
“Did I go to these school districts and visit and see it with my own eyes? No,” Gerdes said.
When Gerdes introduced the legislation last month, he said he fully expected members of the subculture he was targeting to show up at the Capitol “in full furry vengeance” when the bill was heard.
“Just to be clear — they won’t be getting any litter boxes in the Texas Capitol,” the Smithville Republican said in a press release announcing the bill.
But there were no so-called furries or litter boxes at the late-night hearing Tuesday. Instead, the four people who showed up to testify against the measure included a public school teacher and a Texan who worried the measure could affect students with disabilities.
State Rep. James Talarico, a Round Rock Democrat who grilled Gerdes on the legislation, called the bill a “joke,” but said it would have serious consequences for educators. Teachers and schools could face fines of $10,000 to $25,000 for allowing behavior prohibited by the bill.
Talarico questioned whether a student licking their fingers after eating Cheetos would be prohibited by language in the bill, which defines “non-human behavior” as “licking oneself or others for the purpose of grooming or maintenance.” He asked whether students reading “Animal Farm” would be flouting the law if they made sounds like the characters in the book.
Gerdes said neither would meet the intent of the bill, and said he would be open to working with Talarico on the language to make him more comfortable with the legislation.
“I’m not comfortable with any bill that’s going after a non-existent issue,” Talarico responded. He cast the bill as part of an effort by Republicans to undermine public schools.
“Governor Abbott has used this litter box rumor to paint our schools in the worst possible light,” Talarico said. “That’s because if you want to defund neighborhood schools across the state, you have to get Texans to turn against their public schools. So you call librarians groomers, you accuse teachers of indoctrination, and now you say that schools are providing litter boxes to students. That’s how all of this is tied together.”
Gerdes denied the accusation. Later in the hearing, state Rep. Jeff Leach, a Plano Republican, defended Gerdes as a supporter of public schools and cast Talarico’s opposition to the legislation as part of an “obsession” with the governor.
“His hatred for Gov. Abbott and for private school vouchers or educational savings accounts has just gone too far,” Leach said. “You’re highly respected,” he told Gerdes, “and this bill doesn’t change that.”
The committee left the measure, House Bill 54, pending.
Gabrielle Russon
Scottie's Playtime 