Connect with us

National

Texas judge halts abuse inquiries into parents of transgender children

“Judge Meachum’s ruling that the policy is likely unconstitutional & may not be enforced brings welcome relief to the parents & children”

Published

on

Texas Trans youth activists rally at state capitol building to protest ant-Trans laws summer of 202. (Photo Credit: ACL of Texas)

Travis County Texas District Court Judge, Amy Clark Meachum, ordered a preliminary statewide injunction Friday to block the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) from investigations of parents and families of Transgender youth.

Judge Meachum had granted a temporary restraining order on Wednesday to block the DFPS from investigating the plaintiffs of a lawsuit brought by Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas (ACLU of Texas), and the ACLU.

The court’s ruling stops the DFPS from investigating the parents named in the lawsuit because they are working with medical professionals to provide their adolescent child with medically necessary treatment.

The plaintiffs sought this emergency relief after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott issued a directive stating that providing gender-affirming care is a form of child abuse and DFPS announced they would follow the governor’s directive. The lawsuit names Abbott, DFPS Commissioner Jaime Masters, and DFPS as defendants. 

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of an employee of DFPS with a transgender child, her husband, and their transgender teen. According to the complaint, this family has had an investigator already arrive at their home. The family has filed the lawsuit anonymously. 

Friday Meachum ruled there was a “substantial likelihood” that the plaintiffs challenging the law would succeed as the case plays out, ruling Abbott’s order is “beyond the scope of his authority and unconstitutional” and the plaintiffs would be harmed if it was allowed to remain in effect, journalist Alison Durkee reported for Forbes magazine.

“Judge Meachum’s ruling from the bench that the Texas policy is likely unconstitutional and may not be enforced brings a welcome measure of relief to the parents and children whose lives have been thrown into cruel upheaval by this bizarre directive. The state is almost certain to seek an immediate appeal, but Judge Meachum’s carefully reasoned opinion and detailed, thorough findings will be difficult to reverse. This is a great day for families in Texas,” Shannon Minter, the Legal Director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, (NCLR) told the Blade in a phone call immediately after the ruling was made public.

The directive, which Abbott issued to DFPS in February, calls for “prompt and thorough investigation[s] ” into parents of children who have received gender-affirming treatment, after state Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote a legal opinion equating the treatment to “child abuse.”

Dr. Megan Mooney, a licensed psychologist who is considered a mandatory reporter under Texas law and cannot comply with the governor’s directive without harming her clients and violating her ethical obligations, is also a plaintiff in the suit.

“The Trevor Project is relieved that the District Court of Travis County did the right thing and recognized the unlawfulness of the governor’s politically-motivated directive,” said Sam Ames, Director of Advocacy & Government Affairs for The Trevor Project. “While we hope Texas families can rest easier tonight, this fight is not over. No loving parent or ethical doctor should live in fear of doing the right thing by the transgender or nonbinary youth they care for. We will keep fighting with a broad coalition of partners in Texas until the day these investigations are terminated for good, and every young person, no matter their gender identity, knows they are safe, supported, and loved just the way they are.”

“This is a critical victory and important first step in stopping these egregious and illegal actions from Texas officials. We are relieved for our plaintiffs and ready to keep fighting to stop the governor, commissioner, and DFPS from inflicting further harm on trans people and their families and communities across Texas,” said Chase Strangio, deputy director for trans justice with the ACLU LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Transgender youth in Texas should be able to access lifesaving, medically necessary care with the support of their families and doctors. Attempts to cut off transgender adolescents from care will not make them any less trans but it will make them less likely to grow up at all.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

New York

Zohran Mamdani participates in NYC Pride parade

Mayoral candidate has detailed LGBTQ rights platform

Published

on

NYC mayoral candidate and New York State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani (Screen capture: NBC News/YouTube)

Zohran Mamdani, the candidate for mayor of New York City who pulled a surprise victory in the primary contest last week, walked in the city’s Pride parade on Sunday.

The Democratic Socialist and New York State Assembly member published photos on social media with New York Attorney General Letitia James, telling followers it was “a joy to march in NYC Pride with the people’s champ” and to “see so many friends on this gorgeous day.”

“Happy Pride NYC,” he wrote, adding a rainbow emoji.

Mamdani’s platform includes a detailed plan for LGBTQ people who “across the United States are facing an increasingly hostile political environment.”

His campaign website explains: “New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people, but private institutions in our own city have already started capitulating to Trump’s assault on trans rights.

“Meanwhile, the cost of living crisis confronting working class people across the city hits the LGBTQIA+ community particularly hard, with higher rates of unemployment and homelessness than the rest of the city.”

“The Mamdani administration will protect LGBTQIA+ New Yorkers by expanding and protecting gender-affirming care citywide, making NYC an LGBTQIA+ sanctuary city, and creating the Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court upholds ACA rule that makes PrEP, other preventative care free

Liberal justices joined three conservatives in majority opinion

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022, to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, the U.S. Supreme Court)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld a portion of the Affordable Care Act requiring private health insurers to cover the cost of preventative care including PrEP, which significantly reduces the risk of transmitting HIV.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion in the case, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. He was joined by two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with the three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson.

The court’s decision rejected the plaintiffs’ challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s reliance on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force to “unilaterally” determine which types of care and services must be covered by payors without cost-sharing.

An independent all-volunteer panel of nationally recognized experts in prevention and primary care, the 16 task force members are selected by the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to serve four-year terms.

They are responsible for evaluating the efficacy of counseling, screenings for diseases like cancer and diabetes, and preventative medicines — like Truvada for PrEP, drugs to reduce heart disease and strokes, and eye ointment for newborns to prevent infections.

Parties bringing the challenge objected especially to the mandatory coverage of PrEP, with some arguing the drugs would “encourage and facilitate homosexual behavior” against their religious beliefs.

Continue Reading

Popular