J.K. Rowling Says ‘I Wouldn't' Fire Paapa Essiedu From HBO's ‘Harry Potter' for Supporting Trans Rights: ‘I Don't Have the Power' and ‘Wouldn't Exercise It If I Did'
J.K. Rowling said in a new post on X that she does not have the power to fire Paapa Essiedu from HBO's 'Harry Potter' television series, nor would she exercise such power if she had it. 'I May Destroy You' Emmy nominee Essiedu is set to play Severus Snape on the show. The actor recently signed an open letter condemning the U.K. Supreme Court for ruling that transgender women are not legally considered women and transgender men are not legally considered men.
'I don't have the power to sack an actor from the series and I wouldn't exercise it if I did,' Rowling wrote on X while sharing an article about Essiedu. 'I don't believe in taking away people's jobs or livelihoods because they hold legally protected beliefs that differ from mine.'
More from Variety
'Harry Potter' Series Is 'Not Secretly Being Infused' With J.K. Rowling's Anti-Trans Beliefs, Says HBO Boss: 'If You Want to Debate Her, You Can Go on Twitter'
John Lithgow Says He 'Absolutely' Didn't Expect Any J.K. Rowling Backlash After Joining HBO's 'Harry Potter' Series: 'Why Is This a Factor?'
David Tennant Wishes J.K. Rowling 'No Ill Will,' But Hope She Will 'Get Out of People's Way' In the Transgender Community: 'Let People Be'
Rowling has courted controversy since 2020 for regularly sharing beliefs on social media that many believe are transphobic. The author also uses platforms like X to regularly troll her critics and take aim at public figures (such as slamming John Oliver's comments on trans athletes). Both HBO and the new 'Harry Potter' cast have received backlash for getting into business with Rowling due to her anti-trans posts.
HBO confirmed last month the first round of cast members for the new 'Harry Potter' series, including John Lithgow as Albus Dumbledore, Janet McTeer as Minerva McGonagall and Nick Frost as Rubeus Hagrid. When news broke that Essiedu signed an open letter in support of the trans community, many 'Harry Potter' fans wondered how Rowling might react. The letter was signed by other high-profile actors such as 'Bridgerton' star Nicola Coughlan, 'The Last of Us' actor Bella Ramsey and more.
'We the undersigned film and television professionals stand in solidarity with the trans, non-binary and intersex communities who have been impacted by the Supreme Court ruling on April 17,' the letter read. 'The Supreme Court's ruling that, under the Equality Act, 'woman' is defined by biological sex, states that 'the concept of sex is binary, a person is either a woman or a man'. We believe the ruling undermines the lived reality and threatens the safety of trans, non-binary and intersex people living in the UK.'
'Film and television are powerful tools for empathy and education, and we believe passionately in the ability of the screen to change hearts and minds,' the letter continued. 'This is our opportunity to be on the right side of history.'
At a press event last year, Bloys told reporters that Rowling was 'very, very involved in the process' of selecting showrunner Francesca Gardiner and director Mark Mylod to lead the charge on the 'Harry Potter' TV series. He added that Rowling's anti-trans statements 'haven't affected the casting or hiring of writers or productions staff' for the show. A spokesperson for the network added in a statement to Variety at the time that Rowling's 'contribution' to the larger Warner Bros. Discovery company 'has been invaluable.'
Speaking on 'The Town' podcast earlier this month, Bloys stressed to 'Harry Potter' fans that the network's upcoming series will not be 'infused' with Rowling's controversial views on the transgender community.
'The decision to be in business with J.K. Rowling is not new for us. We've been in business for 25 years,' Bloys said. 'We already have a show on HBO from her called 'C.B. Strike' that we do with the BBC. It's pretty clear that those are her personal, political views. She's entitled to them. 'Harry Potter' is not secretly being infused with anything. And if you want to debate her, you can go on Twitter.'
The 'Harry Potter' series is expected to go into production later this year for a premiere sometime in 2026.
Best of Variety
Emmy Predictions: Talk/Scripted Variety Series - The Variety Categories Are Still a Mess; Netflix, Dropout, and 'Hot Ones' Stir Up Buzz
Oscars Predictions 2026: 'Sinners' Becomes Early Contender Ahead of Cannes Film Festival
New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘King of the Hill' Creators Pay Tribute to Jonathan Joss
The creators of King of Hill paid tribute to Jonathan Joss following the news of his tragic death on Sunday. The actor was fatally shot during a dispute near his home in San Antonio, Texas, on Sunday. Series co-creators Mike Judge and Greg Daniels, and revival showrunner Saladin Patterson shared a post on Instagram alongside images of Joss and his King of the Hill character, John Redcorn. 'Jonathan brought King of the Hill's 'John Redcorn' to life for over a dozen seasons, including in the upcoming revival,' they wrote. 'His voice will be missed at King of the Hill, and we extend our deepest condolences to Jonathan's friends and family.' More from Rolling Stone Jonathan Joss, 'King of the Hill' Voice Actor, Fatally Shot at 59 Mike Judge and Zach Woods Pepper Real Celebrities With Dumb Questions in 'In the Know' Trailer Johnny Hardwick, Voice of Conspiracy Nut Dale Gribble on 'King of the Hill,' Dead at 64 On Monday, Nick Offerman told People that the Parks and Recreation cast had been 'texting together about it all day and we're just heartbroken.' Joss played Chief Ken Hotate of the Native American Wamapoke Tribe on the popular sitcom, appearing in five episodes between 2011 and 2015. 'Jonathan was such a sweet guy and we loved having him as our Chief Ken Hotate. A terrible tragedy,' said Offerman. Chris Pratt, who shared the screen with Joss on Parks and Recreation and 2016's film The Magnificent Seven, also mourned Joss' passing. 'Damn. RIP Jonathan. Always such a kind dude,' Pratt wrote on Instagram Stories. 'Sad to see. Prayers up. Hug your loved ones.' Joss was shot and killed by a neighbor on Sunday night in San Antonio, Texas, said authorities. According to The New York Times, the neighbor was identified by investigators as Sigfredo Ceja Alvarez, who was taken into custody and charged with murder. Joss' husband, Tristan Kern de Gonzales, said they had returned to the site of their former home, which had been damaged in a fire, to check on their mail. In a statement shared on Joss' Facebook account, de Gonzales said they were approached by a man who began yelling homophobic slurs and fired his gun. 'Jonathan and I had no weapons. We were not threatening anyone,' said de Gonzales. 'We were standing side by side. When the man fired, Jonathan pushed me out of the way. He saved my life.' Joss was best known for his distinct voice playing Redcorn, a Native American character on King of the Hill, which ran for 13 seasons from 1997 to 2008. The series has been revived 15 years after it ended its original run, and Hulu will debut Season 14 of King of the Hill in August. Before his death, Joss posted a video on Instagram. In the clip, Joss shared his excitement over the return of the beloved series and invited fans to meet him at a comic shop in Austin, Texas, to take photos for free. Best of Rolling Stone The 50 Best 'Saturday Night Live' Characters of All Time Denzel Washington's Movies Ranked, From Worst to Best 70 Greatest Comedies of the 21st Century
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Haste Begets Lawlessness
Last week, a federal court ruled that President Donald Trump had exceeded his statutory authority by imposing a raft of tariffs based on the "national emergency" supposedly caused by the longstanding U.S. trade deficit. Those tariffs are part of an alarming pattern: In his rush to enact his agenda, Trump frequently treats legal constraints as inconveniences that can be overridden by executive fiat. The U.S. Court of International Trade rejected Trump's reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify sweeping import taxes he announced in February and April. The three-judge panel said that 48-year-old law, which does not even mention tariffs and had never been used this way before, does not authorize the president to "impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world." That decision did not affect tariffs that Trump has imposed or proposed under different statutes, such as his taxes on cars, steel, and aluminum. But by invoking the IEEPA, Trump hoped to avoid the specific rationales and sometimes lengthy procedures those laws mandate. Trump's immigration crackdown features similar legal shortcuts. After he asserted the power to summarily deport alleged members of a Venezuelan gang as "alien enemies," for example, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that they had a due process right to contest that designation. That decision did not address Trump's dubious interpretation of the 227-year-old Alien Enemies Act. But several federal judges, including a Trump appointee, subsequently concluded that it made no sense to portray gang members as "natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects" of a "hostile nation or government" that had launched an "invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States." As with tariffs, Trump had a more legally defensible option: deportation of unauthorized residents under the Immigration and Nationality Act. But in both cases, he chose the course he thought would avoid pesky procedural requirements. Something similar happened when Immigration and Customs Enforcement suddenly terminated thousands of records in the database of foreign students with visas authorizing them to attend American universities. Although that move was described as part of a "Student Criminal Alien Initiative," it affected many people without disqualifying criminal records—in some cases, without any criminal records at all. Those terminations "reflect an instinct that has become prevalent in our society to effectuate change: move fast and break things," U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White wrote when he issued a preliminary injunction against the initiative on May 22. "That instinct must be checked when it conflicts with established principles of law." The same instinct is apparent in Trump's conflict with Harvard University. The administration froze more than $2 billion in federal research grants to Harvard, ostensibly because the university, by tolerating antisemitism on campus, had failed to meet its "responsibility to uphold civil rights laws." That decision ignored the legal process for rescinding federal funding based on such alleged violations. The process includes "a lot of steps, but they're important," the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression notes. "They protect students by making sure colleges live up to their obligations. And they protect colleges by making sure they have an opportunity to contest the allegations as well as a chance to make things right." Trump's disregard for the law is coupled with angry dismay at judicial review. As he sees it, any judge who dares to impede his will is a "Radical Left Lunatic," a "troublemaker" and "agitator" who "should be IMPEACHED!!!" After the tariff ruling, a White House spokesman argued that the court charged with interpreting and applying trade laws had no business doing that. "It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency," he insisted. Contrary to that take, "it is emphatically the province and duty" of the judicial branch to "say what the law is," as Chief Justice John Marshall put it 222 years ago. Especially when the executive branch is headed by someone who does not seem to care. © Copyright 2025 by Creators Syndicate Inc. The post Trump's Haste Begets Lawlessness appeared first on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Woman strategically keeps track of dating app matches for this one reason: ‘I lowkey need this'
In today's wild digital dating world — sitting back and endlessly swiping will only get you so far. That's why Caitlin Trask, 32, decided to go the extra mile by creating a 'man catalog' to track all the hopeful men she matches with on dating apps — for research. 'Sorry I can't go out tonight, I have 513 men I have to document in my man catalog,' the hopeless romantic is heard saying in a TikTok video she posted, teasing her method. Trask is strategic with her dating tactics. Although she lives in Denver, Colorado, she purposely changes her location on the apps to various cities to see which loverboys she will match with. Once she receives that anticipated notification — she goes into her Excel spreadsheet to add her connection's age, height, city they live in, job, religion and political stance. While this sounds like a crazy amount of work that some people would roll their eyes at — Trask told People her reasoning for organizing these potential suitors is to see which city has the highest chances of her finding someone she is compatible with. 'Most guys that I am finding are my usual type, which means they have curly hair, good smiles and interesting prompts in their profile,' she told the outlet. 'Someone who it seems like I could have a fun conversation with is what I'm generally finding.' Clearly, she's a data girl because she told People that she enjoys analyzing her findings to uncover patterns in her dating preferences — like the fact that her type in Boston, Massachusetts, are guys over 6 feet 2 inches. 'The ultimate goal is to visit the places where I find there seem to be the most single men that I'm aligned with, and visit there and see if anything comes of it,' Trask said in the interview. Trask's research struck a chord with many people online. 'Women in stem collecting data,' joked one commenter. 'I kept a dating/romance diary all of last year and it was SOOOO helpful in being able to go back and know why these men were horrible people lol,' someone chimed in, agreeing with Trask's extra efforts. 'I lowkey need this,' quipped someone else. And of course, there were some naysayers. 'We spend way too much time thinking about men. They can't even be bothered to read our profiles. Enough,' read a comment. 'Major red flag on so many levels btw,' another commenter wrote.
