Gold Dome Nuggets: ‘Defender' of women, 2026 ambitions and GOP infighting over trans care
The 2025 legislative session is well underway now. Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder
Break out the honey mustard, it's time for nuggets.
Introducing the Georgia Recorder's Gold Dome Nuggets, part of a balanced news diet featuring your weekly recommended allowance of state Capitol happenings that didn't quite generate headlines but gave us all plenty to talk about.
For your first helping of Gold Dome nuggets, we present to you this three-piece special looking at reaction to Trump's transgender sports ban, the nascent field of 2026 gubernatorial candidates and a weird callout from an outspoken state senator.
A House Republican lawmaker's praise of President Donald Trump's national ban on transgender athletes in girls' sports triggered a spirited response from Democrats.
'Mr. Speaker, last week, our great President Donald Trump signed no men in women's sports executive order into law,' said Rep. Reynaldo 'Rey' Martinez, a Loganville Republican, with freshman GOP state Rep. Sandy Donatucci at his side.
'You were there, Mr. Speaker, to witness this historic event, surrounded by girls and women athletes from all walks of life. President Trump said the war on women's sports is over,' Martinez said.
Martinez made his comments Wednesday in the House chamber during a time that is set aside each day for condolences, hat-tips and other speeches from what is called the well. The next day, a group of Democratic women took to the mic in response.
'You know yesterday from the well, the president was portrayed as a defender of women and girls,' said Rep. Anne Allen Westbrook, a Savannah Democrat. 'I was wondering if this was the same president whose record on women and girls I had thought was well known, so I felt it necessary to remind folks of the fuller story.'
Westbrook then read aloud the transcript from the infamous Access Hollywood tape where Trump can be heard talking so explicitly about his sexual advances of women that Westbrook bleeped out several words.
Rep. James Burchett, who is the majority whip and a Waycross Republican, attempted to 'deescalate the situation.'
'I'm asking you to please, please, please, let's not escalate this chamber into a fight from the right or the left. Let's work together. Let's continue to do the good work of the state of Georgia and push the DC politics and national politics aside, and let's just concentrate on Georgia Politics,' Burchett said.
The House GOP leadership has proposed its own ban on transgender athletes in girls' sports. In the Senate, that chamber has already passed its version as well as a bill that would cut off gender-affirming care for state employees, teachers and others covered by the state health benefit plan.
Sen. Jason Esteves, an Atlanta Democrat, addressed rumors that he will run for the governor's office in 2026 – kind of.
Esteves was elected to the Senate in 2022 after serving on the Atlanta Public Schools Board of Education since 2013. The AJC reported Monday that he has been talking with activists and donors in preparation for a potential run.
A reporter asked Esteves about his plans Monday at a Capitol press conference on a proposal to update Georgia's 40-year-old school funding plan to send more dollars to kids living in poverty, but the senator was demure.
'Right now, I'm focused on, like I said, on the session, I'm focused on addressing the issues that we have before us. And like I said, the fact that we have a literacy crisis in the state that has gone unaddressed, I think we need to move on that now.'
Esteves has been called a rising star in the party and an expert on education policy.
Gov. Brian Kemp will not be eligible to run next year because of term limits, so the open seat could attract a lot of attention, and prominent Democrats like former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, Congresswoman Lucy McBath and DeKalb County CEO Michael Thurmond could throw their hats in the ring.
On the Republican side, Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr got in the race early, announcing his intentions back in November, but Lt. Gov. Burt Jones is widely expected to take a shot at the top spot.
Carr got a weird shout-out Tuesday from Trenton Republican Sen. Colton Moore, a conservative gadfly whose antics have sometimes vexed members of his own caucus.
In a Senate debate over a bill that would cut funding for gender-affirming care for state employees from the state health care plan, Moore blamed Carr for settling a 2023 court case brought by transgender workers who had been barred from receiving care.
'I was talking to some folks in northwest Georgia last night about this issue, and I tell you what, they are red mad that a Republican attorney general named Chris Carr could sign this consent agreement and allow their taxpayer dollars to fund transgender surgeries, not only on adults, but also on minors.'
'We hear the Attorney General say, 'Keep choppin',' well, I'm tired of chopping children's genitals with taxpayer money,' Moore added in a crude and inaccurate reference to gender-affirming care.
The underlying bill, sponsored by Sen. Blake Tillery, a Vidalia Republican and Jones ally, also puts the blame on the AG for settling the case 'without prior notice to or approval by the General Assembly.'
Carr has pushed back against accusations that he wants the state to help transgender people.
In January, Carr's office announced that he and 23 other state attorneys general signed onto a court brief opposing taxpayer-funded gender-affirming care and that he had 'taken roughly 50 legal actions to prevent taxpayer-funded gender reassignment surgeries and the chemical and surgical mutilation of Georgia's children.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
33 minutes ago
- Washington Post
‘Come and get me': Gavin Newsom has entered the meme war
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has found himself in the center of the internet's spotlight after squaring off with President Donald Trump on social media over the deployment of military troops to counter protesters in Los Angeles. While police deployed tear gas and shot at protesters in Los Angeles with rubber bullets on Monday, Newsom shared a screenshot on TikTok of a Washington Post headline reporting that California would sue Trump over the National Guard's presence, paired with a trending sound sampled from the movie 'Mean Girls. ' The video was captioned 'We will not stand while Donald Trump illegally federalizes the National Guard' and was liked more than 255,000 times.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides
By Dietrich Knauth (Reuters) -A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that Trump had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico. The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the appeals play out. The tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. The ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term pause. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 U.S. states. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at U.S. borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all U.S. trading partners imposed in April were a response to the U.S. trade deficit. The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long U.S. practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, D.C., also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed. Errore nel recupero dei dati Effettua l'accesso per consultare il tuo portafoglio Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati
Associated Press
34 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Judge tosses lawsuit over Trump's firing of US African Development Foundation board members
A federal judge has tossed out a lawsuit over President Donald Trump's dismantling of a U.S. federal agency that invests in African small businesses. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington, D.C., dismissed the case on Tuesday, finding that Trump was acting within his legal authority when he fired the U.S. African Development Foundation's board members in February. In March, the same judge ruled that the administration's removal of most grant money and staff from the congressionally created agency was also legal, as long as the agency was maintained at the minimum level required by law. USADF was created as an independent agency in 1980, and its board members must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. In 2023, Congress allocated $46 million to the agency to invest in small agricultural and energy infrastructure projects and other economic development initiatives in 22 African countries. On Feb. 19, Trump issued an executive order that said USADF, the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Inter-American Foundation and the Presidio Trust should be scaled back to the minimum presence required by law. At the time, USADF had five of its seven board seats filled. A few days later, an administration official told Ward Brehm that he was fired, and emails were sent to the other board members notifying them that they had also been terminated. Those emails were never received, however, because they were sent to the wrong email addresses. The four board members, believing they still held their posts because they had not been given notice, met in March and passed a resolution appointing Brehm as the president of the board. But Trump had already appointed Pete Marocco as the new chairman of what the administration believed to now be a board of one. Since then, both men have claimed to be the president of the agency, and Brehm filed the lawsuit March 6. Leon said that even though they didn't receive the emails, the four board members were effectively terminated in February, and so they didn't have the authority to appoint Brehm to lead the board. An attorney for Brehm did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Another lawsuit over the dismantling of the agency is still pending before the same judge. In that case, two USADF staffers and a consulting firm based in Zambia that works closely with USADF contend that the Trump administration's efforts to deeply scale back the agency wrongly usurps Congress' powers. They also say Marocco was unlawfully appointed to the board, in part because he was never confirmed by the Senate as required. Leon's ruling in Brehm's case did not address whether the Trump administration had the power to install Marocco as board chair on a temporary basis.
