Any season of the year, the Mountain Chickadee is a delight to encounter. In their breeding season, they form neighborhoods of adjacent territories in the conifer forests of western Canada and the U.S., which ring in the early spring dawn with dozens of cheerful whistled songs. In winter, groups of Mountain Chickadees are joined by other birds — nuthatches, woodpeckers, creepers, kinglets — to form large dispersed flocks that move together through the forest, following the chickadees’ namesake rallying call.
Mountain Chickadees are social birds, living in groups of up to three mated pairs and juveniles of the last breeding cycle for most of the year, only breaking off into territorial pairs for the breeding season. In fact, while we tend to think of the breeding season as the time when mates are chosen and territories are established, most of this actually occurs in the winter. This is when the social hierarchy is solidified between the individuals in a group, and come spring, the dominant birds will reliably take the best territories. While boundaries may shift somewhat, the same birds will usually hold the same territories year after year. Pair bonds are formed during the winter as well, and usually last for as long as both birds survive.
Mountain Chickadees are well-known for their caching behavior. To survive harsh mountain winters, these chickadees hide surplus food throughout their winter territories, a behavior known as “scatter hoarding.” A single chickadee may cache tens of thousands of food items — insects, conifer seeds, or goodies from bird feeders — over the course of a year. They may cache food any time they have extra, and may recover caches any time of the year, but spend the most time caching in the fall, and the most time eating from them in the winter. In fact, studies have shown that Mountain Chickadees living in harsher winter environments have better spatial memory and are more adept at remembering where they have cached food. Unsurprisingly, these birds also survive longer. (snip-MORE)
More than most, the Black-billed Magpie is a bird that inspires strong emotions in humans. A familiar species across much of the West, the Black-billed Magpie is intelligent, adaptable, and bold. For these attributes, they are both admired and loathed. While considered an annoyance or an inconvenience by some, they are also highly social and will occasionally leave “gifts” for humans who feed them.
Like many other intelligent and opportunistic corvids, magpies will take advantage of whatever resources they can. As such, the Black-billed Magpie is probably best known as a scavenger of garbage, carrion, and poorly guarded picnics. This has given these birds a bad reputation, with many regarding them as pests. A common folk belief is that magpies will wound cows to eat their flesh or drink their blood. Magpies will, in fact, stand on the backs of cows to probe and peck. However, the goal is typically not to eat the cow itself, but the parasites on the cow, such as ticks, that are doing just that. Cows are not the only beneficiaries of this behavior — magpies will eat ticks off of other large mammals, including bison, moose, elk, and deer.
The Black-billed Magpie holds a special place in mythology as well. Magpies are recognized as messengers in numerous Indigenous cultures of North America, sometimes to the aid of humans, sometimes to carry news to the Creator. One widespread story tells of how the magpie, for helping humans and birds alike, was given the honor of “wearing the rainbow” — a reference to the iridescent sheen on this bird’s wings and tail. (snip-MORE)
Doesn’t make it better news, just local. I want to add:
This came about because there is a Republican supermajority in Kansas’s legislature. And that came about because the Republicans, who were in trouble in KS because of things they tried to pull (think Missouri/abortion, etc.) that voters don’t want, were worried that they could lose their majority in the Houses. They told Republican voters that if they didn’t keep a solid majority, there would never be a Republican elected ever again because Dems would redistrict Republicans to that place in Egypt. (But they weren’t that funny about it.) So, Republican voters, yet again, voted Republican even though they had strong misgivings, gave us a supermajority, and now the SOB legislators are doing what they, and only what they, want to do. And here we are on the trans issue, and it’s not the only issue they’re going to force.
I strongly, so strongly advise everyone reading to please please please pay attention to the down ticket elections, who is running, and what they’ve done and what they’re saying they’ll do. You have to elect people who understand they work for you, not vice versa. And now, on with the story.
Jaelynn Abegg, a trans rights activist from Wichita, leads a group of around 50 people who used bathrooms Feb. 6, 2026, throughout the Statehouse to demonstrate what she called the absurdity of a state bathroom ban. The same law that includes the bathroom ban also invalidates driver’s licenses for transgender people. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)
TOPEKA — Transgender rights activist Jaelynn Abegg was furious Thursday morning when she received a letter from the state informing her that her driver’s license had been invalidated because of a new state law.
Abegg, a Wichita resident, said she would only get a new driver’s license if she needs one before fleeing the state, which she plans to do as soon as she can afford it. In the meantime, she figures her U.S. passport will be “ID enough.”
“When things like this happen, I honestly get a little bit of a demon of rebellion in me, and I’m not sure exactly how I’m going to manifest that, if at all right now, but I can tell you that I’m very angry,” Abegg said. “I’m heartbroken. “This is my home state. I’ve lived here all but two years of my life, and yet, every year since I’ve been living as a woman and having come out as transgender, this state has done nothing but break my heart. If this state was a romantic partner, I would definitely call this an abusive relationship at this point.”
The Kansas Department of Revenue this week sent a letter to Kansans affected by a new law, which took effect Thursday, that requires the gender marker on a driver’s license to match a person’s sex at birth.
The letter informs trans Kansans that because the Legislature didn’t include a grace period for updating credentials, they are “invalid immediately, and you may be subject to additional penalties if you are operating a vehicle without a valid credential.” A spokesman for the agency told Kansas Reflector the law invalidated about 1,700 licenses.
The letter directed trans Kansans to surrender their driver’s license to the state before they can receive a new one, which will cost them $8.
“We apologize for the inconvenience this causes you,” the unsigned letter said.
Republicans in the Legislature placed transgender Kansans in their crosshairs at the start of this year’s session. The House Judiciary Committee scheduled a hearing with less than 24 hours notice on the second day of the session for a bill that would invalidate their driver’s licenses. The bill was a response to a Kansas Court of Appeals ruling last year that determined there was no harm in letting people change their gender markers, which Kansans have done since at least 2002 with no complaints.
A week after the rushed hearing, in a flurry of procedural maneuvers, the committee took action on the bill without warning. Republicans added language that would make it illegal for someone to use a public building bathroom, or similar space, like a locker room, that conflicts with their sex at birth. They then inserted the contents of the House bill into an unrelated Senate bill that passed the year before. That allowed the House and Senate to pass Senate Bill 244 the next day without ever holding a public hearing on the bathroom provision.
Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill on Feb. 13. The House and Senate subsequently overrode her veto with all but one Republican, Rep. Mark Schreiber of Emporia, voting in favor of the bill.
Abegg, who organized a Feb. 6 “pee-in” protest, in which trans people and their allies filled a bathroom at the Statehouse, said lawmakers were “blatantly subverting the democratic process … because they know they’re going to get blowback.”
“This is a hallmark of a Legislature and of a government that has a deep, deep sickness in it, and it really saddens me that we’re living to see days like this, where there’s that sort of situation going on, and there’s not a greater public outcry about it,” Abegg said. “This should be a concern to everyone who values democracy and who values Kansas as a free state.”
Trans Liberty, a political action committee that fights for trans rights, issued its first-ever statewide evacuation order Thursday, when it urged transgender Kansans to flee.
Samantha Boucher, founder of Trans Liberty PAC, said in a statement there is “something deeply wrong with a government that erases its own citizens’ legal identities.”
Abegg said the warning to leave is “absolutely the right approach.”
“I don’t think that legislators in Kansas are done harassing trans people,” Abegg said. “I think that transgender health care for adults is coming next. It would not shock me within the next two to five years to see them come after name changes for transgender people. The cruelty has always been the point, and the objective has always been the complete erasure of transgender people from public life.”
Trans people and their supporters rally Feb. 6, 2026, at the Statehouse in opposition to Senate Bill 244. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)
Jessie Lawson, a trans woman from Wichita, initially planned to go to the DMV and refuse to pay for a new license, then decided against it.
“I can work from home and, for the moment, minimize the risk of getting pulled over,” Lawson said.
She said her first thought when she read the letter from the state was to wonder “how conservatives can live with so much fear and hate in their hearts.”
“Even at my most angry, I’ve never wanted to see an entire demographic of people wiped off the planet the way they do. It’s unreal,” she said. “The second thought is how I’m going to survive now that bigotry has been officially sanctioned by the state of Kansas.”
Lawson said she has wrestled with whether she should leave the state where she has lived her entire life.
“I have a great job and own my own home,” Lawson said. “All of my friends are here. Leaving would be very difficult for me. At the same time, this place is becoming increasingly hard for me to exist safely as bigotry takes more and more control of the state government.”
She added: “Please publish whatever you get from us. There needs to be a record that we existed and strove for peace and joy as long as we could.”
Rep. Brooklynne Mosley, D-Lawrence, posted on her Facebook page that she would be available Friday to drive people to the DMV to replace their birth certificates. She said she was willing to personally pay for up to five individuals’ fees if they have financial constraints.
The new law also affects birth certificates.
Jill Bronaugh, spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, said individuals will be responsible for contacting the Office of Vital Statistics to replace their invalidated birth certificates, and a $20 fee will apply.
The agency identified 1,849 birth certificates on which the sex has been changed, which can be attributed to correcting data entry errors or recognizing gender changes, she said.
“Each amended birth certificate will be reviewed manually by staff to determine if the birth certificate must be invalidated and amended,” Bronaugh said. “This process is expected to take several months to complete.”
I am so tired of a small group of Christian nationalists who demand the right to force their religious views and church doctrines on the rest of the country. They want and are working for a Christian theocracy in the US. I just posted about how Kanas pushed a law over the veto of the governor that bans trans markers on drivers licenses and makes all trans drivers licenses that don’t match birth sex of the person immediately void and illegal. All because of refusing to accept the facts and medical science. These attacks on drag are just a way to get at trans people. Drag has a long history in vaudeville, on TV from the beginning of comedy, anyone remembeer flip Wilson who was hallirise as a woman. Hugs.
And while the law doesn’t have language explicitly referencing drag performances, SB 12’s original version specifically included them. Republican leaders have also made it clear that drag shows are the target.
“Texas Governor Signs Law Banning Drag Performances in Public. That’s right,” Gov. Greg Abbott said in a post on X in June 2023.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday reaffirmed a November ruling removing a block on Senate Bill 12 and denied a request by plaintiffs for a rehearing.
Drag Queen Brigitte Bandit performs during a Fight The Trump Takeover Rally at the south side steps of the Capitol on Saturday, Aug. 16, 2025. Ronaldo Bolaños for The Texas T
Texas can enforce a 2023 law that restricts some public drag shows, a federal appeals court reaffirmed in a new ruling on Wednesday.
Senate Bill 12 prohibits drag performers from dancing suggestively or wearing certain prosthetics on public property or in front of children. The law would fine business owners $10,000 for hosting such performances, while those who violate the law could be hit with a Class A misdemeanor.
In September 2023, U.S. District Judge David Hittner declared the law unconstitutional, saying that it “impermissibly infringes on the First Amendment” and that it is “not unreasonable” to think it could affect activities like live theater or dancing. More than two years later in November, a three-judge panel in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unblocked the law and returned the case to the district court.
On Wednesday, the appeals court withdrew its November opinion and reissued a largely identical ruling, denying the plaintiff’s request for a rehearing in the process. SB 12 will now take effect on March 18, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, who represented several of the plaintiffs.
As part of the ruling, the panel found that most of the plaintiffs — a drag performer, a drag production company and pride groups — failed to show that they intended to conduct a “sexually oriented performance,” and therefore, could not be harmed by the law. The ruling suggests that the federal judges don’t believe all drag shows are sexually explicit.
Critics of the ban have previously raised concerns that Republican lawmakers were portraying all drag performances as inherently sexual or obscene.
And while the law doesn’t have language explicitly referencing drag performances, SB 12’s original version specifically included them. Republican leaders have also made it clear that drag shows are the target.
“Texas Governor Signs Law Banning Drag Performances in Public. That’s right,” Gov. Greg Abbott said in a post on X in June 2023.
SB 12 considers a performance to be sexually oriented if the performer is nude or engages in sexual conduct, which could include “actual contact or simulated contact” between one person and another person’s “buttocks, breast, or any part of the genitals.” It also has to “appeal to the prurient interest in sex” — and most didn’t meet this criteria, according to the appeals court’s ruling.
Transgender Kansans are being informed on the eve of a new state law going into effect that their driver’s licenses will be considered invalid as of Thursday.
“Please note that the Legislature did not include a grace period for updating credentials. That means that once the law is officially enacted, your current credentials will be invalid immediately, and you may be subject to additional penalties if you are operating a vehicle without a valid credential,” read letters mailed by the Kansas Department of Revenue’s vehicles division.
“Pursuant to the new law, if the gender/sex indication on the face of your current credential does not match your sex assigned at birth, you are directed to surrender your current credential to the Kansas Division of Vehicles,” reads the letter, which The Star reviewed multiple copies of.
The international accompaniment movement teaches us that to sustain an emergency response to state violence, we must build durable, collective and supportive structures now.
Targeted state violence and rising fascism are being met with creative organizing by people in Minneapolis and across the country, from mass marches to neighborhood mutual aid to ICE watch foot patrols. These are all beautiful manifestations of resistance that have kept many people safe and demonstrated widespread repudiation of the Trump administration’s policies.
Yet as state-sanctioned violence becomes more coordinated, normalized and national in scope, we must continue adapting our response systems to shifting needs. Emergency response structures set up in moments of crisis can often lead to isolated, reactive decision making with responsibility falling on a few shoulders, creating the conditions for burnout, security failures, movement fragmentation and individual and organizational missteps or even collapse.
Here we can draw on some hard-earned lessons from our predecessors in the decades-long international accompaniment movement, who witness, stand with and provide security support for human rights defenders, communities and activists under attack by authoritarian regimes in Latin America.In response to sometimes devastating losses, accompaniment organizations developed a set of skills and strategies over many years for collaborative, sustainable decision making to respond to security incidents while under conditions of constant threat. We ourselves learned these skills in our many years of working with accompaniment organizations in Guatemala, Honduras and Colombia from 2008 to 2022.
We share here principles and practices from this legacy, which we hope organizations and networks, whether formal or informal, can use to develop emergency response structures that are sustainable, don’t overly burden a few individuals with the difficult decision making, actively build collective capacity and shared analysis, and support skill-building for more people in our movements.
What we present here are suggestions, and we invite you to adapt them to particular organizations and situations. They may take a bit more planning and preparation than may seem available in moments of urgency. But if we want to sustain our movements for what, unfortunately, is likely to be a long struggle, we must begin now to put durable, collective and supportive structures into practice.
1. No one person decides alone
Decision making in emergency security situations is emotionally and mentally taxing. Stress can narrow our literal and metaphorical fields of vision. And because the weight of a decision can be incredibly heavy to bear — especially if things go wrong — no one ever made a decision alone in the accompaniment organizations of which we were a part. We had clearly established protocols for which people, based on their roles in the organization, would come together for specific emergency response decisions.
For example, we established regional subcommittees based on where a security incident occurred. Each subcommittee was composed of a security lead, a representative from the advocacy team and on-the-ground volunteers, who worked together to assess, analyze and respond to emergency situations.
Applying this principle in a U.S. context, organizers of a publicly advertised protest could set a team of folks who gather at an office or a home to monitor social media and news reports for security incidents or threats, and be ready to make decisions about emergency response.
2. Prepare decision-making structures and roles beforehand
Emergency response or crisis moments are when people are most activated and are also the most likely to lead to organizational, interpersonal or movement conflict. This shouldn’t come as a surprise. After all, we are being subjected to situations of prolonged violence directed at ourselves and people we care for. We want to show up in the best way possible, yet often also feel frustration, impotence or rage.
In our accompaniment organizations, we mitigated stress and conflict (to the extent possible) by having clear processes and roles for decision making.
First, we frontloaded as many decisions as possible before an emergency, allowing us to focus on the situation at hand rather than spend time debating who would do what and delaying important support for the impacted individuals. Knowing who is going to be involved in emergency response reduces the need for conversation and shortens the response time.
The Peace Brigade International accompanies the Front of People in Defense of Land and Water in Amilcingo, Mexico. (Facebook/Peace Brigades International)
We have seen this play out in high-risk moments in our accompaniment work. For example, when we responded to nationwide protests that extended over months and saw daily murders of protesters by military and police forces, we set up a rotating decision-making group. Because roles and communication channels had already been agreed upon, colleagues didn’t have to debate who should verify information, call other allied organizations or set up our emergency response protocol. They could simply act.
Second, we made decisions in consensus. While clear decision-making structures are essential, that doesn’t necessarily mean they have to be hierarchical. We’ve found in our accompaniment work that decisions are easier to implement when everyone has a hand in shaping them. A consensus-based decision-making structure keeps any one person from carrying the whole mental load (see “No one person decides alone”) and lets us actually use the full brainpower in the room. We all come with different lived experiences, risk tolerances and ways of thinking, which means we’re bound to catch things others won’t and, luckily, vice versa.
This works best when folks talk it out together and create a clear timeline to decide. In the example above, if the group got stuck, they would start with a quick break to rest and regroup, and if that fails, go to a smaller predesignated subgroup — and, if even that doesn’t work, have a clear fallback decision-maker. Something else we’ve learned: Consensus tends to work better when we trust each other and each other’s criteria, so it helps to make the effort to get to know each other, grab a coffee or go for a walk before the emergencies happen.
3. Some participants in decision making should be offsite
It might seem logical that those directly involved in the emergency response should be onsite, able to see the situation firsthand and respond immediately. In fact, we learned in our accompaniment work that involving folks offsite as advisors or even decision makers can provide essential perspective, bring in crucial information and further spread the decision-making burden.
In one protest scenario, while tensions escalated on the ground, an off-site team a few blocks away tracked both police staging and local news sources and relayed that information back to organizers. This wider view allowed on-the-ground leadership to make informed choices without relying only on what was immediately visible.
4. Rotate the decision makers
Holding a decision-making role in an emergency situation is not easy; it means putting your body on high alert, navigating complex situations and grappling with violence directed at our communities. This, unsurprisingly, takes a toll on us over an extended period of time (more on this below).
Even if we believe we can hold this indefinitely, the reality is that, without moments to regulate our nervous systems, our bodies normalize the constant alertness, making it harder to activate when necessary and to properly analyze what is truly an emergency. We want our emergency decision makers to be well-rested, regulated and connected — for their wellbeing and ours, too.
That’s why we recommend that the decision makers in an emergency situation shift on an agreed-upon rotation. Depending on organizational structure, the best rotation might be every protest or event, or it might be a time period, like a week. This not only gives us a chance to skill up more folks in emergency response (always a benefit for our movements!), but it also gives us decision makers a chance to rest and recharge.
In the protest scenario previously mentioned, once things settled for the day, the people who had been making decisions rotated out. Some went home to sleep; others took quiet time away from phones and updates. A few days later, once they were rested enough to look at what they’d learned and what might need to change next time, they checked back in for the follow-up stage.
5. Institute Urgency Guides
Prolonged emergency situations make it harder over time to accurately recognize urgency. When everything feels critical, true emergencies can become blurred. Clear guidelines help mediate this by providing structure and clarity for decision making under sustained stress. In our accompaniment work, we used the following guidelines to categorize our responses:
On alert (prior to emergency): The situation seems to be escalating. We have seen a few signs indicating the risk level may be increasing (increased presence of armed actors, state or non-state, counter-protesters gathering, surveillance signs, suspected infiltration, etc.). Start to notify the security team (on and offsite) and start to implement increased security measures.
Immediate response (minutes to hours after): The emergency situation is active; the threat has not yet passed and there is potential for the situation to escalate or repeat. The physical and emotional well-being of impacted individuals is prioritized immediately.
Rapid (24 to 48 hours after): The specific situation has passed, but there is potential of it repeating in the near future. This could be because we will go to the same location in the next few days, or the event we are hosting will continue, or the aggressor is still nearby or indicating potential harm to our communities.
Follow-up (a few days to weeks after): The situation has passed. Here we focus on analysis and whether we need to adapt our organizational and movement strategy. This is also a great time to broaden the analysis by including allies in answering questions like: What was the aggressor’s desired impact? Have we seen this strategy used before? What are the increased security measures we may need to implement based on this situation?
We have used this for years in accompaniment spaces, allowing us to clearly mark stages in our response and who had to be involved. For example, when activists we were supporting suffered an assassination attempt, the attention moved from split-second decisions (immediate response) to checking in with impacted participants, ensuring medical attention, locating others who could be targeted next and finding safe houses, to adjusting security plans for the next day and watching for signs the situation might flare up again (rapid response). Later still, the group circled back to look at what had happened and what it meant going forward (follow up).
6. Establish ways to take care of yourself and your team before and after taking on decision-making roles.
When stepping into an emergency response decision-making role, it is essential to shore up your emotional resources before an emergency and repair your heart and mind afterward. This will look different for everyone, but all organizations and networks should dedicate time and space for everyone involved in emergency response to do this. You might employ the same tools for shoring up and for repairing: They could include a nice walk with your dog, tea with a close friend, reading a good book or taking a bath.
Whatever you need to rest and recharge, identify those activities and build them into your plans. We know this is hard, and to be clear, this level of care has not always been consistently present within accompaniment organizations; its absence often contributes to rapid turnover and diminished response capacity. Naming this matters. After more than a decade of collective work in emergency accompaniment, we have seen clearly that constant crisis response is not sustainable if people’s nervous systems are never given real opportunities to rest and regulate.
This is why we believe it is so important to speak directly about intentional, collective care practices not as an ideal, but as a necessary condition for the longevity and effectiveness of accompaniment and emergency response itself.
We don’t need to reinvent the wheel
These tools aren’t a panacea for the real risks presented by escalating state violence. They won’t stop all arrests, injuries, raids, deportations or assassinations. They won’t undo the harm already done or bring back the people we’ve lost. But the more we incorporate skillful emergency response tools into our repertoire, the more we can stay connected to one another under pressure, reduce preventable harm, and keep showing up again and again without burning out, fragmenting or turning on each other.
None of this work is new. We are drawing from the accumulated knowledge of mentors, organizers, human rights defenders, journalists, accompaniers, medics, lawyers and movement elders who have spent decades responding to fascist and authoritarian governments across regions and generations. From underground networks resisting military dictatorships, to civil rights organizers facing state-sanctioned terror, Indigenous land defenders, abolitionists, anti-colonial movements and transnational solidarity networks, people have long been building collective security, emergency response and care structures under conditions that mirror in many ways what we are facing now.
Luckily, this means we don’t have to reinvent the wheel. We just need to know how to look to the past, to other contexts and to each other for guidance and support. The more intentional we are,the better we’ll be able to keep up the struggle so that, one day soon, we will not just have survived fascism but defeated it.
A recent article from Jesse Singal in the New York Times seemed to indicate the organization might be quietly retreating from supporting trans youth care.
Yesterday, anti-transgender activist and columnist Jesse Singal published a piece claiming there were “cracks in the wall” around gender-affirming care (which you can find fully fact-checked here). To make that case, he relied heavily on a statement from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons that bypassed the organization’s normal scientific review process and was advanced under pressure from leadership aligned with the Trump administration, including a president who is a major Republican donor. Singal also invoked the American Psychological Association, suggesting the organization was retreating from its 2024 position supporting transgender care and rejecting claims that gender identity is “caused” by external factors. But a representative for the APA tells Erin In The Morning that the organization stands firmly by its 2024 guidelines supporting transgender youth care and provided documentation indicating Singal mischaracterized its position.
“No, APA’s position has not changed,” says a representative speaking for the APA, attaching a link to their 2024 policy statement which provided broad support for gender-affirming care. “APA continues to support unobstructed access to evidence-based care for transgender and gender-diverse individuals of all ages.”
The 2024 policy statement is to date one of the most significant supportive stances of any medical organization for gender-affirming care. It states that gender-affirming medical care is medically necessary, opposes bans on gender-affirming care, declares that being transgender is not caused by autism or post-traumatic stress, establishes the organization’s support for combatting disinformation on transgender healthcare, and finds that rejection of a trans youth’s gender identity can increase their risk of suicide and harm their psychological wellbeing. The policy was passed overwhelmingly, 153-9, with each voter representing a large subset of the organization’s 157,000 members. Now, the organization says that it is not accurate to claim that there is any regression on support for transgender youth care from the organization.
The organization also disputes Singal’s portrayal of a 2025 letter written by Katherine McGuire to the Federal Trade Commission. In his piece, Singal claims the APA “cautioned that gender dysphoria diagnoses could be the result of ‘trauma-related presentations’ rather than a trans identity,” and noted that “co-occurring mental health or neurodevelopmental conditions (e.g., depression, anxiety, autism spectrum disorder) … may complicate or be mistaken for gender dysphoria,” framing this as evidence that the organization is retreating from its 2024 policy supporting transgender youth care. That interpretation is incorrect, according to an APA representative, who says the letter does not contradict the organization’s 2024 position and does not represent a regression in its support for evidence-based transgender care. (snip-MORE)
And again with the big-money outsiders meddling in state lawmaking:
The ballot initiative is bankrolled by billionaire anti-trans donor, Richard Uihlein, and represents a new line of attack against transgender people in blue states.
Anti-trans organization “Protect Girls Sports in Maine” has announced that it has collected enough signatures to get a combination transgender sports ban and school bathroom ban onto the November 2026 ballot, making Maine the second state this year to announce a ballot initiative targeting transgender people in a blue state after a similar effort in Washington. This comes after Maine Gov. Janet Mills fiercely rejected Trump administration attempts to strongarm the state into enacting such restrictions on its own, under threat of losing school lunch money and more. Now, voters may directly determine the fate of transgender youth in schools across the state after a massive signature drive bankrolled by billionaire Republican megadonor Richard Uihlein, the latest in an attempt by ultra-wealthy conservative donors to export anti-trans discrimination across the United States through direct ballot measures.
“Not only will our initiative become the only citizen-led issue to appear on the 2026 Maine ballot, but we will likely be the first state where voters can protect female sports at the ballot box this November. We will pave the way for the rest of this nation,” said Leyland Streiff, the lead petitioner, about the ballot initiative turn-in. Notably, he remained cagey about bathrooms, which the ballot initiative will also heavily impact, in a possibly strategic angle to hide that the bill is much more expansive than he gives credit for.
The initiative would, according to the summary page, define a person’s sex for school purposes as “a person’s biological status as male or female recorded at birth on the person’s original birth certificate.” It would “require schools to maintain separate restrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms, and other private spaces for each sex,” going beyond sports. It would also create a “private right of action” for a student who “suffers direct injury because of a violation of a provision of the initiated bill,” allowing students to sue if they encounter transgender students in bathrooms at schools or in sports. Lastly, it specifically carves out transgender students in bathrooms and sports from the Maine Human Rights Act.
Maine LGBTQ+ organizations fiercely condemned the bill. David Farmer, speaking on behalf of an opponent coalition of LGBTQ+ organizations across the state, called the referendum a “one-size fits all approach to sports participation and bathrooms that will increase bullying and harassment and cost local schools millions of dollars for construction and litigation.” He also called out the billionaire backing of the bill, stating, “This is a cynical attempt by one of the richest people in the world to manipulate voters in hopes of influencing the U.S. Senate race, the race for governor and the races for Congress.” (snip-MORE)
Scottie's Playtime 