Trans student's arrest for violating Florida bathroom law is thought to be a first
A transgender college student declared 'I am here to break the law' before entering a women's restroom at the Florida State Capitol and being led out in handcuffs by police. Civil rights attorneys say the arrest of Marcy Rheintgen last month is the first they know of for violating transgender bathroom restrictions passed by numerous state legislatures across the country.
Capitol police had been alerted and were waiting for Rheintgen, 20, when she entered the building in Tallahassee March 19. They told her she would receive a trespass warning once she entered the women's restroom to wash her hands and pray the rosary, but she was later placed under arrest when she refused to leave, according to an arrest affidavit.
Rheintgen faces a misdemeanor trespassing charge punishable by up to 60 days in jail and is due to appear in court in May.
'I wanted people to see the absurdity of this law in practice,' Rheintgen told The Associated Press. 'If I'm a criminal, it's going to be so hard for me to live a normal life, all because I washed my hands. Like, that's so insane.'
At least 14 states have adopted laws barring transgender women from entering women's bathrooms at public schools and, in some cases, other government buildings. Only two — Florida and Utah — criminalize the act. A judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked Montana's new bathroom law. Transgender woman Marcy Rheintgen. AP
Rheintgen's arrest in Florida is the first that American Civil Liberties Union attorneys are aware of in any state with a criminal ban, senior staff attorney Jon Davidson said.
Rheintgen was in town visiting her grandparents when she decided to pen a letter to each of Florida's 160 state lawmakers informing them of her plan to enter a public restroom inconsistent with her sex assigned at birth. The Illinois resident said her act of civil disobedience was fueled by anger at seeing a place she loves and visits regularly grow hostile toward trans people.
'I know that you know in your heart that this law is wrong and unjust,' she wrote in her letter to lawmakers. 'I know that you know in your heart that transgender people are human too, and that you can't arrest us away. I know that you know that I have dignity. That's why I know that you won't arrest me.'
Her arrest comes as many Republican-led states that have enacted restroom restrictions grapple with how to enforce them. Laws in Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky and North Dakota do not spell out any enforcement mechanism, and even the state laws that do largely rely on private individuals to report violations.
In Utah, activists flooded a tip line created to alert state officials to possible violations of its bathroom law with thousands of hoax reports in an effort to shield transgender residents and their allies from any legitimate complaints that could lead to an investigation.
The Republican sponsors of the Florida bathroom law, Rep. Rachel Plakon and Sen. Erin Grall, did not immediately respond Thursday to phone messages, emails and visits to their offices to seek comment on Rheintgen's arrest. They have said the restrictions are needed to protect women and girls in single-sex spaces.
Opponents of the law such as Nadine Smith, executive director of the LGBTQ+ advocacy group Equality Florida, said it creates dangerous situations for all by giving people license to police others' bodies in bathrooms.
'The arrest of Marcy Rheintgen is not about safety,' Smith said. 'It's about cruelty, humiliation and the deliberate erosion of human dignity. Transgender people have been using restrooms aligned with their gender for generations without incident. What's changed is not their presence — it's a wave of laws designed to intimidate them out of public life.'
If Rheintgen is convicted, she worries she could be jailed with men, forced to cut her long hair and prevented temporarily from taking gender-affirming hormones.
'People are telling me it's a legal test, like this is the first case that's being brought,' she said. 'It's how they test the law. But I didn't do this to test the law. I did it because I was upset. I can't have any expectations for what's going to happen because this has never been prosecuted before. I'm horrified and scared.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Groundhog Day as John Swinney tries to justify SNP's failed strategy
Trying to claim defeat in Hamilton as some sort of improvement from the disastrous Westminster election defeat is beyond parody. John Swinney was all over the by-election in Hamilton – he has to take the blame for ignoring the campaign wishes of the local SNP members, and focusing instead on Reform while letting Labour slip through the middle. READ MORE: Activists question John Swinney's independence strategy after by-election loss Let's be clear: Labour had a rubbish candidate and campaign but still out-polled the SNP. Yet again support for independence far outstrips support for the SNP – why? Is it because everyone can see that under Swinney there is no hope for independence with the SNP? Even former MSP/ MP/leadership lackey Anne McLaughlin is claiming online that the SNP can't campaign on independence as the party has no plan on how to achieve it! That should wake up SNP members that this party is going nowhere under Swinney. We are getting a repeat performance of his last failed attempt at leadership. Swinney hasn't learnt the lessons of why he lost in 2003 – so I don't hold out much hope of any review of this latest by-election failure. Until Swinney – or a capable leader – brings forward plans for independence then the SNP is just another centrist party like any of the London-led parties. It's time for a real change in the SNP, not a retread of Swinney's tired old campaigning nonsense. Alex Beckett Paisley DIDN'T Stan Grodynski nail it on the head (Letters, Jun 8)? My only reservation is that I have scant faith this SNP party leadership will heed his message. I hope I'm wrong, because there's still time to kick the necessary action into gear before the 2026 election, which really is the party's last-chance saloon. But we'd need to see the Scottish Government attacking Westminster policy where it acts against Scottish interests. We'd need to see the blame for perceived policy failures in Scotland laid at Westminster's door, where real responsibility lies. Remember that we are where we are after more than 300 years of English rule, not just the 18 years of SNP government that Starmer likes to ram down our throats at PMQs in protection of his establishment exploiting us. READ MORE: Do the SNP no longer have a strategy for gaining independence? We'd need to show the funding limitations of the Barnett formula, which leave us having having to make choices between rather than for Scotland's needs. We'd need to trumpet the party's success areas and remind Scottish voters of the many benefits the party has delivered in their years of government, which are limited by devolution. And we'd need to highly the many areas on which we differ in cultural and political outlook: weapons of mass destruction, nuclear power, the EU, supporting genocide in Gaza, global trade, human rights, immigration, poverty, drugs, equality of opportunity, and equality generally, ambition for future prosperity, and more. There are so many generally held areas of difference. We need to reinforce that none of the three main right-wing Unionist parties can truly serve the interests of Scots, they merely wish to maintain the Union's exploitation of us. READ MORE: What is the rationale behind the SNP's 'wheesht about indy' stance? We need to attack the Union status quo with a vengeance, diligently all the way to the 2026 election. The SNP need to engage with the wider movement and make it the irrefutable de facto referendum that the democracy-denying Starmer-led Labour government denies us, in flagrant breach of our fundamental rights as the historic nation we are, and supposedly in partnership within the UK union, rather than the colonised territory that binds us to England's domination. The clock is ticking. Let's hope Stan's party is settling into its starting blocks, the starting gun poised for firing. Let's get the campaign going with that bang! Jim Taylor Scotland I CALLED it in this paper some time ago. 'Lessons will be learned'. This was the cry from the hapless Angus Robertson, soon followed by others. Well, I know someone who has already learned a lesson. ME. I did not think the result would bother me either way, but after thinking on it I came to a sorry conclusion. The SNP have taken away from me my dream of an independent Scotland in my lifetime. Their performance in this week's vote was lacklustre to say the least. How does it feel to lose to an Invisible Man? To me it feels like a betrayal of all I thought the SNP was. Everybody, including the head yins in the SNP, knows the reason for the defeat. It is the same reason we have had to put up with since 2014. No action on independence. READ MORE: SNP must turn support for independence into 'real political action', says Swinney Before you say 'Old John has thrown his toys out of the pram', let me assure you that is not the case. I have thrown the pram away with the toys in it! I have decided that I will not be banging my head against a brick wall any more. I am doing a Mhairi Black and giving politics a miss. Until there is a change of leadership in the SNP and a rock-solid commitment on independence, I am taking a Sabbatical. I am so upset that I feel the very heart and soul have been ripped from me. If all of you out there are happy just to carry on like this, then I am happy for you! We might as well call an election and get it over with because 2026 is not going to be pretty. A Unionist government awaits us in Holyrood. The SNP are quite happy to trundle along and ask us to vote for them at elections. They just want to play nice politics and hope for a referendum being given to us by Westminster. Well, I've had enough of all their weasel words. The SNP have no desire to make any progress on independence. If they had, then the promise of 2026 being a defining moment would have got us over the line on Thursday. But no, more of the same and look where it got us. Humiliated. I would like to thank The National for all the letters of mine that have been printed and wish all of you who support independence good luck. With this lot in charge of the SNP, you are going to need a lot more than luck! I may return one day when things are different, but at my time of life that is unlikely. I have been worn down by a party that was formed on the bedrock of Scottish independence. It is now a very pale imitation of that! Thank you all. Old John Ayrshire
NBC News
4 hours ago
- NBC News
Oklahoma inmate Richard Glossip to face new murder trial but without death penalty
Oklahoma's top prosecutor said Monday the state intends to pursue a new murder trial against inmate Richard Glossip but without the death penalty after the U.S. Supreme Court vacated his capital conviction in a rare victory for a death row prisoner. State Attorney General Gentner Drummond's decision to retry Glossip, 62, on a first-degree murder charge came out of a status conference hearing. In a news release, Drummond said, the evidence still implicates him in the 1997 murder of Oklahoma City motel owner Barry Van Treese. Glossip, a motel manager working for Van Treese, has maintained his innocence while he was on death row for almost three decades. While Drummond, a Republican, has not agreed with Glossip's innocence claims, he was supportive of the Supreme Court's ruling in February, when the majority of justices, he said, agreed "it is now an undeniable fact that he did not receive a fair trial." He said in a statement Monday that he would ensure Glossip receives an impartial one now. "While it was clear to me and to the U.S. Supreme Court that Mr. Glossip did not receive a fair trial, I have never proclaimed his innocence," Drummond said. "After the high court remanded the matter back to district court, my office thoroughly reviewed the merits of the case against Richard Glossip and concluded that sufficient evidence exists to secure a murder conviction." Oklahoma County District Attorney Vicki Behenna, a Democrat, had previously indicated that Glossip would not be eligible for the death penalty now if he were to be retried. Drummond said he would seek a life sentence for Glossip at his next trial. "While I cannot go back 25 years and handle the case in the proper way that would have ensured true justice, I still have a duty to seek the justice that is available today," he added. The continuation of the state's prosecution against Glossip resumes a twisting case that saw him dodge death several times with nine separate execution dates that had to be postponed. Various courts had delayed the executions as he appealed, while state corrections officials also came under scrutiny a decade ago for botched execution attempts. But Glossip's case had been championed in recent years by a bipartisan group of Oklahoma legislators after an indepe n dent report they commissioned in 2022 found that "no reasonable jury hearing the complete record would convict Glossip of first-degree murder." The report centered on the state's primary witness, Justin Sneed, who had confirmed to the report's investigators that he had discussions with multiple family members about "recanting" his testimony over an 11-year period. Investigators also said the district attorney's case file included documentation describing how the state provided Sneed information "so he could conform his testimony to match the evidence" from other witnesses. Glossip's original 1998 conviction was overturned in 2001, when a state appeals court found that the evidence against him was weak. But the state took him to trial again, and a second jury found him guilty in 2004. At Glossip's trial, Sneed, a motel handyman, admitted that he killed Van Treese, but said that it was at Glossip's direction and that he had been promised $10,000. In exchange for testifying against Glossip, Sneed received a life sentence while Glossip was given the death penalty. Prosecutors said Glossip orchestrated the plot because he was embezzling from the motel and feared being fired. The Supreme Court tossed out Glossip's capital conviction in a 5-3 ruling. Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate, presumably because he was involved in the case when he was on a federal appeals court that includes Oklahoma. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the majority's ruling that prosecutors "knew Sneed's statements were false" and that "because Sneed's testimony was the only direct evidence of Glossip's guilt of capital murder, the jury's assessment of Sneed's credibility was necessarily determinative here." "Hence, there is a reasonable likelihood that correcting Sneed's testimony would have affected the judgment of the jury," she added. After the Supreme Court's decision, Glossip was moved off death row, but was held without bail in the Oklahoma County Detention Center on a first-degree murder charge. A next court date in Glossip's case is scheduled for June 17. Glossip's attorney, Don Knight, did not immediately comment about the prosecutors' decision, but had welcomed the Supreme Court's ruling in February that spared his longtime client from the death chamber. "He had nine execution dates, three last meals, and obviously, to finally get relief has been huge for him," Knight said, "and he's thrilled beyond words."
South Wales Argus
5 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Abergavenny mosque plan could be put on hold at meeting
Monmouthshire council's ruling cabinet agreed in May to grant a 30-year lease to the Monmouthshire Muslim Community Association who plan to use the vacant building as a mosque and cultural centre. It would be the county's first mosque. However three councillors have 'called in' the decision meaning it will be reviewed at a special meeting of the council's place scrutiny committee. The nine member, cross party committee, will have to decide whether to accept the cabinet's original decision to grant the lease or if they agree there were flaws in the decision making process they can ask the cabinet to look at the decision again. The committee also has the power to refer the decision to the full council, which would then have to look at how the decision was made and decide whether to accept it or send it back to the cabinet to reconsider. If the cabinet does have to take the decision again it must do so within ten working days and will be asked to consider the comments made but can stick by its original decision, amend it or overturn it. Conservative councillors Louise Brown and Rachel Buckler, who represent Shirenewton and Devauden in the south of Monmouthshire, and Llanelly Hill independent Simon Howarth called the decision, made by the Labour-led cabinet, in for review. Their request highlights three grounds for doing so which are a claimed 'lack of proper scrutiny/due process and community consultation', how the building was marketed and their concerns over 'best value' at the £6,000 a year lease. When the cabinet agreed to grant the lease it was stated the accepted bid was the highest scoring on the application process that was intended to explore opportunities to maximise social benefit and generate a financial return from an otherwise empty building. The cabinet was also told 30-year leases were common and the cabinet had declared the building, that was last used as a pupil referral unit, as surplus in November when it granted the council's landlord services permission to market the building as available to lease. It was built by Scottish American philanthropist Andrew Carnegie, though it closed as a library in 2015 when the service transferred to the town hall. Councillors were also told commercial uses, which could be allowed under the restrictions of the building's covenant, had been considered and the agreed rent was said to be in the context of 'significant investment' required, from the lease holders, in the 120-year-old grade II listed building. The call in also states 'community engagement is required' as no planning permission is needed as there is no change in the use class of the building. The special meeting will take place, at Monmouthshire County Hall in Usk, on Wednesday, June 11 at 5.30pm.
