Proposed Alabama drag ban could impact high school theater productions
House Minority Leader Scott Stadthagen, R-Hartselle, speaks with staff on the floor of the Alabama Senate on Feb. 4, 2025 in Montgomery, Alabama. The Alabama Legislature began its 2025 session on Tuesday. His bill to ban drag performances in schools and libraries may also effect theater production, but he says he is working with an unnamed senator on an amendment to protect theater productions. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)
The Alabama House of Representatives passed a bill last week that would ban drag performances in schools and public libraries.
But it could also impact theater productions statewide.
HB 67, sponsored by Rep. Scott Stadthagen, R-Hartselle, defines drag performances as 'a performance in which a performer exhibits a sex identity that is different from the sex assigned to the performer at birth using clothing, makeup, or other physical markers.'
According to the Alabama Educational Theatre Association (ALEdTA), with fewer boys participating in theater in high school, girls often play boys' roles to fill the cast. The association said the legislation could impact school theater productions.
'We all know that in the current environment where boys are not participating as much in theatre; this will have a negative impact on educational theatre,' ALEdTA wrote in a Facebook post Monday.
Historically, the opposite was true. In Ancient Greece, women were considered inferior to men and unfit for the stage, so female roles were played by men. The same was true in the Elizabethan era for plays by William Shakespeare. Premature boys often played female roles because of women's limited social status.
The association is calling on its members to advocate for an amendment to the legislation in the Alabama Senate that would exempt theater productions from the restriction on drag performances. The association provided a letter template on the post for its members to send to their senator.
'This bill without needed amendments will force teachers to provide less performance opportunities for students. It will also heavily reduce the plays and musicals that we can perform in Alabama,' the letter said.
Stadthagen said in an interview Wednesday the legislation was not meant to impact theater and that he is working on an amendment for the Senate to make that explicit.
'It does not pertain to that at all,' he said. 'The intent is not to harm theater or anything like that. The intent, of course, is to eliminate drag.'
Huntsville High School this fall planned to stage 'Peter and the Starcatcher,' a Tony-award winning play based on the backstory of Peter Pan but switched productions due to the possible implications of the legislation.
'This change was made thoughtfully and early in the planning process before casting occurred to ensure the production aligns with any legal and logistical considerations that may arise,' Craig Williams, a spokesperson for the school system, wrote in an email Wednesday.
Stadthagen said in an interview Wednesday that he had not heard of any theater productions being cancelled and said that was not necessary.
'They don't need to be cancelling anything at all,' he said. 'They have nothing to worry about, I promise you.'
The bill awaits consideration from the Senate Education Policy Committee, which did not have its regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
17 minutes ago
- CBS News
GOP leaders cite L.A. immigration protests to push for quick passage of Trump's "big, beautiful bill"
Washington — The White House and Republican leaders in Congress are urging lawmakers to quickly get behind the centerpiece of President Trump's legislative agenda, saying the ongoing immigration protests in Los Angeles adds urgency to the push to secure additional resources for border security. House Speaker Mike Johnson said on X on Monday that the legislation, which addresses Mr. Trump's tax, energy and immigration priorities, "provides the ESSENTIAL funding needed to secure our nation[']s borders." Republicans call the legislation the "one big, beautiful bill." "The lawlessness happening in LA is ANOTHER reason why we need to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill IMMEDIATELY," Johnson said, pledging that Congress will support Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who he said are "fighting to keep Americans safe against illegal aliens AND the radical left." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt shared a similar message earlier Monday, saying the scenes unfolding in some areas of Los Angeles "prove that we desperately need more immigration enforcement personnel and resources." "America must reverse the invasion unleashed by Joe Biden of millions of unvetted illegal aliens into our country," Leavitt said in a post on X. "That's why President Trump's One Big, Beautiful Bill funds at least one million annual removals and hires 10,000 new ICE personnel, 5,000 new customs officers, and 3,000 new Border Patrol agents." Speaker of the House Mike Johnson holds a press conference after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Trump's agenda at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025, in Washington, legislation is now in the hands of the Senate after the House narrowly approved it last month following weeks of intraparty disagreement over its components. Though the bulk of the funding allocated in the legislation goes toward tax cuts, it also includes resources aimed at bolstering border security and defense. It provides $46.5 billion for the border wall, $4.1 billion to hire Border Patrol agents and other personnel and more than $2 billion for signing and retention bonuses for agents. It also imposes an additional $1,000 fee for people who are filing for asylum in the U.S. The disagreement among Republicans over the bill has largely centered on cuts meant to offset the bill's spending, including restrictions to Medicaid. In the House's razor-thin GOP majority, the disagreements threatened to tank the bill's progress at every stage. And as the bill moved to the Senate for consideration last week, Johnson warned the upper chamber against making significant changes that would throw off the delicate balance. Senate Republicans initially voiced support for separating the complicated tax components and border security provisions into two separate bills to deliver Mr. Trump a victory on immigration early on in his tenure. But House Republicans opposed the approach, expressing doubts that the president's agenda could pass through the narrow GOP majority in the lower chamber in separate parts. Senate Republicans are now seeking to amend the House-passed bill, sending it back to the House for approval with a goal of getting the legislation to the president's desk by the July 4 holiday. And with a 53-seat majority, the upper chamber can afford to lose just three Republicans. Last week, opposition from Elon Musk threatened to throw a wrench into the legislation's progress, after he stoked concerns by fiscal hawks about the bill's impact on the deficit. The episode, which began with Musk calling the bill "a disgusting abomination," erupted into a dramatic and public feud between Musk and the president last week. But the dispute did not appear to spark significant new opposition the the bill in Congress. The urgency expressed Monday surrounding securing additional border resources comes as Mr. Trump called for the National Guard to enforce order in the L.A. area amid protests over activity by ICE, prompting a clash with California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Newsom warned that the move would inflame the situation, while urging that there is no shortage of law enforcement. The governor indicated late Sunday that his office plans to sue the Trump administration over Mr. Trump's move. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the president's move on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" Sunday, claiming Newsom "has proven that he makes bad decisions." "The president knows that [Newsom] makes bad decisions, and that's why the president chose the safety of this community over waiting for Gov. Newsom to get some sanity," Noem added.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iowa Landowners Fight Seizure of Private Property for a Pipeline
A privately owned company is proposing a pipeline across five states. While some of the state governments appear to be on board, the project is facing backlash from a large and formidable population: property owners. The pipeline, known as Summit Carbon Solutions, would span 2,500 miles and transport carbon dioxide (CO2) captured at 57 ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, and the Dakotas to a permanent underground storage site in North Dakota. Construction of the $9 billion pipeline is expected to begin this year, with operations kicking off in 2026. In June 2024, the project received regulatory approval from the Iowa Utilities Commission, despite landowner protests. Julie Glade and her husband, Paul, are Iowans who oppose the project because of its use of eminent domain. Their property aligns with the proposed route, and in 2022 the couple was visited by a land agent. "The guy who came to our door wanted us to sit down and sign it without reading it," Glade tells Reason. "They swooped in and tried to contact as many people as possible right away before the people knew what the consequences were. It's very unethical." Several other landowners in the state share the Glades' worries. During a hearing conducted by the Iowa Utility Commission, landowner Joan Gaul testified against the pipeline, which she said would cross a large portion of her farmland. Gaul said Summit Carbon Solutions mailed two easements, which would give the pipeline a legal right to her land, to her without notice. "This letter came telling us about taking our land using eminent domain. It was a difficult pill to swallow," she said. Gaul said she didn't accept the easements and has indicated that she will continue to fight the project. The Glades visit the Iowa Capitol nearly every week to voice their opposition to the pipeline. They are joined by what the couple calls a diverse coalition united by their concern for the basic constitutional right to land ownership. "We have MAGA Republicans and we have lefties. We put our differences aside and we work together," she says. The Glades' efforts could soon pay off. In May the state Senate passed House File 639, which would prevent CO2 pipelines from using eminent domain unless the company proves the pipeline meets the definition of public use. The bill would also prevent CO2 pipelines from operating longer than 25 years. The bill is awaiting the signature of Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds, who is reportedly weighing opinions from pipeline supporters and detractors. If passed, the bill would represent a significant win for the rights of Iowa property owners. It would also be the latest setback for the Summit Carbon Solutions project. After the company launched a blitz of eminent domain lawsuits in South Dakota, Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden signed a bill into law in March preventing carbon dioxide pipelines from receiving eminent domain permission in the state. The post Iowa Landowners Fight Seizure of Private Property for a Pipeline appeared first on
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Democrats are looking for answers — outside Washington
On the campaign trail, President Trump made a lot of promises. He promised to strengthen our economy. He promised to make our government more efficient. He promised to bring down costs. But after more than 100 days in, our economy is not strengthened, our government is certainly not more efficient, and costs are not down. The president has entangled us in trade wars with some of our closest trading partners — wars that erased $10 trillion from the stock market this spring and threaten to decimate family farms in my district and across the country. And with the help of the Department of Government Efficiency, he has waged an all-out assault on the federal government in an effort to weed out 'waste, fraud, and abuse.' I believe the American people elected Trump because they wanted solutions to pocketbook issues and a government that took action to get things done. But the president's agenda isn't working, and Democrats need to deliver. That's where the New Dem Coalition comes in. Before I explain why, I want to acknowledge that Democrats haven't always gotten everything right. During the election, we saw many working class voters drift away from the party. At times, our emphasis on identity politics or concepts like 'saving democracy' — while undeniably important — overshadowed the core economic issues that affect people's everyday lives. Instead of meeting voters where they are, we sometimes come across as telling them where they should be. That approach can feel out of touch and give the impression that the party is elitist, disconnected from the realities of everyday people. Working class voters are focused on how they'll afford their mortgage, put food on the table, or save for their kids' college — not necessarily on abstract debates about the soul of the nation. Don't get me wrong: the threat to democracy is real and urgent, especially with a president who shows little respect for courts or the Constitution. But if we're truly going to save democracy, we must build a broader coalition and bring more voters along. That means meeting people where they are, rather than telling them what should matter most. We need to address the tangible, kitchen-table issues that keep folks up at night. The New Dem Coalition has always done this. We have prioritized the needs of hard working Americans over the politics of D.C. We understand that we should be finding ways to make our government more efficient. We understand that we have to work across the aisle when we can — without compromising our values. That's why New Dems are crafting a proactive agenda — not only to win the House majority in 2026, but to maintain it for the long term. So, we're getting out of the D.C. bubble for a new series known as 'New Dems On the Road.' We'll be engaging with communities across the country, and gathering the critical feedback we need to guide our work. We're tackling every issue — from improving education outcomes to bolstering our national security — and working to find practical, lasting solutions that reflect the values and priorities of the American people. For our first stop, we zeroed in on immigration. Immigration isn't a problem we're going to solve overnight, but it's one that is consistently top of mind for the American people. We've come close to bipartisan solutions, only for selfish interests to squash our efforts in the 11th hour. That's why New Dem Immigration and Border Security Working Group members Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.) and Lou Correa (D-Calif.) sat down with Arizona leaders to talk about immigration. They met with industry and union representatives, members of the Arizona business community, and DACA recipients to discuss the importance of immigrants to Arizona's economy. The panel addressed the need to secure our border and pass a long-lasting immigration reform policy. It was instructive. And it showed the folks in these communities that we are listening to them. We know we don't have it all figured out — that's why we need real, local voices to help guide our work. Voices on the ground who are living and breathing these problems every single day. Then, it was my turn. I joined my friends Reps. Scott Peters (D-Calif.) and Wesley Bell (D-Mo.) for a conversation around clean energy and potential opportunities for bipartisan cooperation. We discussed the actions the Trump administration has taken to gut clean energy tax credits. There is no way around it — this is going to have a negative impact on people's utility bills. They will feel this. We also discussed what's ahead — like permitting reform, carbon capture and ultimately ways we can lower costs for people trying to keep the lights on, not raise them. Last month, Reps. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) and Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) got together to talk one-on-one with Delawareans about paid family and medical leave for working families. This is just the beginning. In total, we'll be conducting at least nine New Dems On the Road events — across the country. We need to come together, share ideas and forge a new path forward. A path that can address the issues that demand our attention: whether it's a single mom struggling to afford child care, a farmer looking to break into new markets, or a family who wants a good, public school education for their kids. We should all be committed to finding effective ways to achieve our shared goals and ensure that the government serves the people better. This isn't a partisan objective; it's a matter of common sense. However, real progress requires thoughtful strategy and careful action, not reckless cuts. Simply slashing budgets without consideration doesn't eliminate waste — it erodes the very foundation of what our government is meant to do: serve its citizens. New Democrats understand this deeply. We recognize that this moment calls for a meaningful response and an agenda that inspires — not the status quo. Our communities have elected us to take action, to solve problems and to improve lives. Now, more than ever, Democrats need to prove we can deliver Nikki Budzinski represents the 13th District of Illinois and is vice chair for policy for the New Dem Coalition. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
