Tennessee lawmakers have advanced a host of anti-LGBTQ bills that would run counter to U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Two measures, both proposed by Rep. Gino Bulso, R-Franklin, would challenge landmark cases that legalized same-sex marriage and established protections for discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
Rep. Gloria Johnson, D-Knoxville, questioned the legality to going against Bostock v. Clayton County, which established that LGBTQ people are protected from discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Tom Lee, member of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Pride Chamber, spoke against the bill, arguing that it could allow discrimination against LGBTQ couples.
“Imagine if under this bill a private employer said, ‘Well, you can’t take family leave because I, as a private citizen, don’t recognize — using the language of the bill — your purported marriage,’” Lee said. “Or a bank says, ‘You’ll pay the higher rate (for unmarried couples). We’re not bound by the 14th Amendment. You’re not married in our eyes.’”
The Banning Bostock Act would codify that laws prohibiting sex discrimination would not prohibit discrimination against a person for being homosexual or transgender, nor would it prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation, sexual behavior, gender identity, or gender non-conforming behavior.
Meanwhile, the next bill would allow private citizens, businesses, and organizations to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage, and protect attorneys from being punished for refusing to celebrate or perform a same sex marriage.
Bulso first appeared here in February 2024 for his ultimately failed bid to ban Pride flags, which he is now attempting again. In April 2024, we heard from Bulso when he objected to a ban on marriages between first cousins because gays can’t make babies. Last year Bulso launched a failed bid to fill the US House seat left open by the abrupt resignation of Rep. Mark Green.
Why is the most intense bigotry always seem to be pushed by Christians? I don’t understand the hate because no one is walking around nude in bathrooms, and women’s bathrooms do not have urinals just enclosed stalls. No one can see in the stalls. All the talk of protecting little girls is BS because if a man ws going to hurt a child he wouldn’t have to pretend to be trans, he would just walk in and do it. Nope this is all about making trans lives miserable and keeping them out of the public / society. This is all about forcing their religious views on everyone else. There church doctrines don’t accept trans people so no one can accept trans people or be trans in public according to them. They see no problem forcing their religious views on everyone else but scream to their highest heaven when they are told they have to respect other people’s views. Hugs
Just last week, the Kansas legislature passed some of the most far-reaching measures to push trans and gender-nonconforming people out of public life to date. Bathroom bans that bar trans people from restrooms aligned with their gender identity have become grimly common; over 20 states have such a law on the books. But Kansas’s new anti-trans bathroom bill adds a dangerous twist: a bounty hunter provision.
The law would permit private citizens to sue and seek monetary reward based on claiming to encounter a trans person in the bathroom. That’s on top of some of the harshest punishments of any existing bathroom bans, such as criminal charges, steep fines and even jail time.
The language of the bill, while vague, says that any person who alleges to be “aggrieved” by the presence of a trans person they encounter in a restroom facility can file a civil suit against that individual for “damages” of at least $1,000. Kansas Republicans rushed through the bathroom ban, skirting public comment by essentially sneaking the bill into another piece of legislation aimed at denying trans people correct government IDs.
The following veto message is from Governor Kelly regarding her veto of House Substitute for Senate Bill 244:
“This poorly drafted bill will have numerous and significant consequences far beyond the intent to limit the right for trans people to use the appropriate bathroom. Under this bill: If your grandfather is in a nursing home in a shared room, as a granddaughter, you would not be able to visit him. If your wife is in a shared hospital room, as a husband, you would not be able to visit her.
“If your sister is living in a dorm at K-State, as a brother, you would not be able to visit her in her room. If you feel you have to accompany your nine-year-old daughter to the restroom at a sporting event, as a father, you would have to either enter the women’s restroom with her or let her use the restroom alone.
“I believe the Legislature should stay out of the business of telling Kansans how to go to the bathroom and instead stay focused on how to make life more affordable for Kansans. “Therefore, under Article 2, Section 14(a) of the Constitution, I hereby veto House Substitute for Senate Bill 244.”
The bill passed with a veto-proof majority in both chambers, so an override is probably likely. The bill’s author is GOP Rep. Susan Humphries, whose bio notes that she is a graduate of Texas Christian University. Humphries last appeared here in 2024 for her bill that would somehow ban minors from visiting any website that mentions LGBTQs.
Horrific abuse of civil rights. ICE is trying to scare people. People have legal right to protest and to follow / record ICE gang thugs. The ICE gang thugs have no authority to arrect citizens as they do not have police powers. Again are we a free people, do we have rights anymore? Hugs
Andres Wilkinson, 52, faces up to 10 years in federal prison if convicted
LAREDO, Texas – A U.S. Customs and Border Protection supervisor is facing federal charges over allegations he harbored an immigrant living in the country illegally, according to a news release. Court documents state the immigrant was both his girlfriend and niece.
Andres Wilkinson, 52, made his initial appearance Wednesday, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas said, and will remain in custody pending a detention hearing.
Wilkinson has worked for CBP since 2001, according to the release, and was promoted to a supervisory position in 2021.
“In that role, his duties included overseeing the enforcement of customs and immigration laws,” the release states.
According to a criminal complaint, CBP’s Office of Personal Responsibility received information from Homeland Security Investigations on April 23, 2025, that a woman living in the country illegally was living at Wilkinson’s residence in Laredo.
The complaint identifies Wilkinson as the woman’s boyfriend. Authorities also received research indicating the woman is the daughter of Wilkinson’s brother, making her Wilkinson’s niece.
The woman initially entered the U.S. on a visitor visa in August 2023, the complaint alleges, and later overstayed authorized travel.
“The complaint further alleges that Wilkinson was aware of her unlawful immigration status,” the release states, “yet maintained a romantic relationship with her.”
Records show the woman had multiple entries into the U.S. until December 2023, when she began living in the U.S. with her husband at an apartment in Laredo, according to the complaint.
The woman’s husband petitioned for his wife’s legal residence in January 2024, but the case was closed after the husband withdrew the petition in April 2025.
In May 2025, the office observed Wilkinson meeting with the woman and her daughter, who is a minor, according to the complaint.
From June through November 2025, law enforcement conducted surveillance at Wilkinson’s residence and observed the woman living there with her daughter, according to the complaint. Investigators also noted the woman used vehicles registered to Wilkinson.
Investigators detained and interviewed the woman on Feb. 5, 2026. According to the complaint, the woman told investigators she had been living with her uncle, Wilkinson, since August 2024.
The woman said Wilkinson “financially supported her,” with housing, credit cards and assistance with financial obligations, the complaint states. The woman also said Wilkinson was aware that she was consulting with an immigration attorney “to resolve her immigration status.”
The woman told investigators she crossed U.S. Border Patrol checkpoints in a vehicle driven by Wilkinson at least twice. The complaint also alleges the two traveled to San Antonio together in August 2025.
If convicted, Wilkinson faces up to 10 years in federal prison and a fine not to exceed $250,000. The release did not state his current employment status with CBP.
By the right people does she mean white people from majority red states and by elect the right leaders does she mean republicans who kiss tRump’s fat ass? The constitution is clear that the states run elections not tRump and his election deniers. The fact is undocumented people cannot vote in federal elections. Some states or communities do let adults who live there vote on local matters. Also why is tRump being allowed to make laws through excutive ordeers instead of congress? He can’t do that. Where are the democrats to challenge these things? Hugs
I am tired of the gaslighting and lies. Blatantly claiming to be following the court’s orders when they clearly are not and giving the middle finger to the courts. Are we a nation of laws or are we now a nation ruled by corrupt gang thugs who as one person in the DOJ said “tell the court to fuck itself”. Where has the Republican Party of law and order gone? When the Democrats are in charge the Republicans sue all the time to block things. Look how many times Biden was blocked by the courts in lawsuits filed by Republicans. How would they have reacted if Biden’s administration just ignored the courts like tRump’s admin is doing? Are we at a crisis point yet? Hugs
Sheer scale of the lawsuits threatens to clog the judicial system
About 700 Justice Department attorneys deployed to represent the government in immigration cases
Hundreds of judges around the country have ruled more than 4,400 times since October that President Donald Trump’s administration is detaining immigrants unlawfully, a Reuters review of court records found.
The decisions amount to a sweeping legal rebuke of Trump’s immigration crackdown. Yet the administration has continued jailing people indefinitely even after courts ruled the policy was illegal.
“It is appalling that the Government insists that this Court should redefine or completely disregard the current law as it is clearly written,” U.S. District Judge Thomas Johnston of West Virginia, an appointee of President George W. Bush, wrote last week, ordering the release of a Venezuelan detainee in the state.
Most of the rulings center on the Trump administration’s departure from a nearly three-decade-old interpretation of federal law that immigrants already living in the United States could be released on bond while they pursue their cases in immigration court.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said the administration is “working to lawfully deliver on President Trump’s mandate to enforce federal immigration law.”
SOARING NUMBER OF IMMIGRANT DETAINEES
Under Trump, the number of people in ICE detention reached about 68,000 this month, up about 75% from when Trump took office last year.
A conservative appeals court in New Orleans last week gave the Trump administration a victory in its drive to lock up more immigrants. Just because prior administrations did not fully utilize the law to detain people “does not mean they lacked the authority to do more,” U.S. Circuit Judge Edith Jones wrote in a decision reversing rulings that led to the release of two Mexican men. Both remain free, their lawyer said.
Other appeals courts are set to take up the issue in the coming weeks.
Tricia McLaughlin, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson, said the increase in lawsuits came as “no surprise” – “especially after many activist judges have attempted to thwart President Trump from fulfilling the American people’s mandate for mass deportations.”
The department did not respond to more specific questions about the cases and data findings in this story.
With few other legal paths to freedom, immigrant detainees have filed more than 20,200 federal lawsuits demanding their release since Trump took office, a Reuters review of court dockets found, underscoring the sweeping impact of Trump’s policy change.
In at least 4,421 cases, more than 400 federal judges ruled since the beginning of October that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is holding people illegally as it carries out its mass-deportation campaign, Reuters found.
A chart showing the number of habeas challenges to immigration detention by month
Other cases are pending, have been dismissed because the detainee was released, or were transferred to another judicial district, which would force immigrants to file a new case. Reuters was unable to determine how many cases were moved or re-filed.
Joseph Thomas, an 18-year-old high school student from Venezuela, was arrested during a traffic stop in Wisconsin in late December, while riding with his father, Elias Thomas, on his Walmart delivery route.
The men are asylum seekers who entered the United States in August 2023. Both are authorized to work, their lawyer, Carrie Peltier, said. Peltier said they were stopped for “driving while brown.”
Within a month, judges ordered the release of father and son.
Chief U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz – also a Bush appointee – ruled that Joseph had been detained illegally and ordered his immediate release. In his ruling, he said Joseph was not subject to mandatory detention, and called out a “lack of any evidence that ICE had a warrant when it detained Joseph while he was a passenger in his father’s car.”
U.S. District Judge Eric Tostrud, a Trump appointee, ruled that Joseph’s father Elias was eligible for a bond hearing.
“This raises an issue of statutory interpretation that courts in this District have repeatedly considered and rejected, and it will be rejected here as well,” Tostrud wrote in his order.
Joseph is now taking classes online, afraid to return to school.
LANDSLIDE OF LAWSUITS
Habeas corpus – Latin for “you shall have the body” – emerged in the English courts in the 1300s and is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. It provides a legal recourse for people the government has detained unlawfully.
Reuters counted habeas lawsuits by gathering the dockets of every publicly filed federal court case over more than two decades from Westlaw, a legal research tool that is a division of Thomson Reuters.
The records, combined with other court filings, offer the most comprehensive view to date of the scale of lawsuits moving through the U.S. justice system and of the defeats for the administration.
Within the span of a few days in January, lawyers filed habeas petitions for Liam Conejo, a five-year-old Ecuadorean boy detained in the driveway of his Minnesota home; a Ukrainian man with a valid temporary humanitarian status who was detained on his way to work as a cable technician; a Salvadoran man married to a U.S. citizen and father of a 3-year-old autistic child who is also a U.S. citizen; an Eritrean hospital worker with refugee status who was arrested after letting agents into his apartment complex and a Venezuelan man who was arrested after dropping off his daughter at school.
None had criminal records.
DIVERTED LAWYERS, VIOLATED ORDERS
The rush of lawsuits is forcing the U.S. Justice Department offices to divert attorneys who would normally prosecute criminal cases to respond to habeas cases.
Using court dockets, Reuters found more than 700 Justice Department attorneys representing the government in immigration cases. Five of the attorneys each appeared on the dockets of more than 1,000 habeas cases.
Partly as a result of that legal logjam, judges have found that the government has left people locked up even after judges ordered their release.
In a court order, issued last month in Minnesota, Schiltz said the government had violated 96 orders in 76 cases. The U.S. Attorney there, Daniel Rosen, said in a filing, two days later that the cases had created an “enormous burden” for government attorneys.
Similarly, U.S. District Judge Nusrat Choudhury, an appointee of Democratic President Joe Biden in New York, wrote this month that ICE violated two “clear and unambiguous orders” by flying a man to New Mexico for detention while falsely claiming he was in New Jersey and could be brought to a court hearing.
A Justice Department spokesperson, Natalie Baldassarre, said the administration “is complying with court orders and fully enforcing federal immigration law.”
“If rogue judges followed the law in adjudicating cases and respected the government’s obligation to properly prepare cases, there wouldn’t be an ‘overwhelming’ habeas caseload or concern over DHS following orders,” she said.
LEGAL HURDLES
In New York, advocates have waited outside immigration court to connect detained immigrants with lawyers who can file same-day habeas claims – blocking their rapid transfer to a detention center in another state.
On January 16, U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken issued an emergency ruling for an Ecuadorean man who was detained at his court hearing, barring the government from moving him out of New York. On January 30, U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter, who like Oetken was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama, ordered his immediate release.
Still, many immigrants aren’t able to seek that relief. Some aren’t aware that they can file a habeas case. Others can’t find affordable lawyers.
Judy Rall, the U.S. citizen wife of a Venezuelan detainee who has spent almost a year at the Bluebonnet detention center in Texas, said she was quoted upwards of $5,000 to file a habeas petition, which she could not afford. She and her husband have a pending immigration case based on their marriage, but the government has declined to release him while the case is being adjudicated. He has no criminal record, but the government has alleged, without providing evidence, that he has links to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.
This month, her lawyer offered to take on the habeas case for free.
“Our home burnt down, and I had told them I needed him to come help,” she said. “I assume that is the reason.”
Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston, Kristina Cooke in San Francisco and Brad Heath in Washington, D.C.; additional reporting by Brad Brooks in Minneapolis; Editing by Craig Timberg and Suzanne Goldenberg
February 13, 2026
Scottie's Playtime 