Supreme Court says parents can opt kids out of LGBTQ books in elementary schools
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
a minute ago
- Telegraph
Supreme Court asked to overturn gay marriage rights
The Supreme Court has been asked to overturn gay marriage a decade after it was legalised. Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk, filed a petition calling on justices to take away the right to marry for same-sex couples, claiming the original ruling was 'egregiously wrong'. Davis, 59, served five days in prison in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licences to David Ermold and David Moore on religious grounds shortly after same-sex marriage was legalised. She was ordered to pay $100,000 to the couple for emotional damages and $260,000 to cover their attorney fees. In a 90-day writ filed last month, Davis appealed the payments, arguing her First Amendment protections to practise her religion freely protected her. She also urged the high court to review its decision in the Obergefell v Hodges case, which extended marriage rights for same-sex couples, describing it as 'legal fiction'. 'The mistake must be corrected,' Liberty Counsel, the nonprofit law firm representing Davis, wrote in the petition. 'If ever a case deserved review, the first individual who was thrown in jail post-Obergefell for seeking accommodation for her religious beliefs should be it. 'Davis was jailed, haled before a jury, and now faces crippling monetary damages based on nothing more than purported emotional distress,' the filing continued. 'Supreme Court unlikely to take up case' The petition is understood to be the first time since 2015 that the Supreme Court has been formally asked to reverse the ruling legalising gay marriage. At the time, Davis was the sole authority in Rowan County in charge of issuing marriage licences on behalf of the government. Lower courts have dismissed her claims, and few legal experts expect the Supreme Court to take up her case. 'Not a single judge on the UD Court of Appeals showed any interest in Davis's rehearing petition, and we are confident the Supreme Court will likewise agree that Davis's arguments do not merit further attention,' an attorney for Mr Ermold and Mr Moore told ABC News. Davis's appeal comes amid a renewed push by conservatives opposed to gay marriage to allow each state to set its policy. So far this year, at least nine states have either introduced legislation aimed at blocking new marriage licences for gay couples or passed resolutions calling on the high court to reverse the same-sex marriage ruling, according to the advocacy group Lambda Legal. The Davis petition argues that the court should treat same-sex marriage in the same way it dealt with the issue of abortion, in its 2022 decision to overturn Roe v Wade. Mat Staver, the founder of Liberty Counsel, said: 'Kim Davis's case underscores why the US Supreme Court should overturn the wrongly decided Obergefell v Hodges opinion because it threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman. 'Obergefell cannot just push the First Amendment aside to punish individuals for their beliefs about marriage,' Mr Staver continued. 'The First Amendment precludes making the choice between your faith and your livelihood. 'The high court now has the opportunity to finally overturn this egregious opinion from 2015.'
Telegraph
a minute ago
- Telegraph
Teachers can ask to be called Mx rather than Mr or Mrs, says Phillipson
Bridget Phillipson has said teachers have the right to ask to be called Mx rather than Mr or Mrs. The Education Secretary said school staff 'can make that request' if they did not identify as either male or female. Mx is defined as a gender-neutral title that is often used by people who are transgender or consider themselves non-binary. Earlier this month, The Telegraph revealed that a primary school in the south-east of England had listed a new teacher, who is biologically male, as Mx in a list of staff members. Asked whether teachers should be able to request the honorific, Ms Phillipson told LBC: 'I think teachers can make that request. But of course, what we'll be looking at is making sure that people are able to exercise their views on this topic too. 'This has been the subject of various legal cases as well about people's rights in terms of how they approach questions of gender identity. We'll consider all areas of the practical guidance that schools need, and [respond] to the challenges that they tell us they've faced.' More than 260,000 people living in England and Wales identify with a gender different from their sex registered at birth, according to the 2021 census. Ms Phillipson was unable to say when the long-awaited transgender guidance for schools would finally be published. The Equality and Human Rights Commission is also expected to issue new guidance in response to a Supreme Court ruling earlier this year. In April, Britain's highest court declared that transgender women are not legally women in a verdict hailed as a victory for feminist campaigns amid concern about single-sex spaces. But experts have warned that it is likely to have consequences for schools' admission policies, with a grey area around whether all-girls schools, for example, could turn down transgender teenagers who were born as boys. 'It's important we take time to get this right' Asked when guidance for schools may be published, Ms Phillipson replied: 'So the last government was consulting on this at the point of the election. That consultation concluded and we had to look at all of those responses. 'But also what happened subsequently was Dr Hilary Cass published her final review around gender-questioning children. 'So I think it is important, given the sensitivity of this area, that we make sure that the guidance we publish is aligned fully with Dr Cass's recommendations. And I do think it's important we take the time to get this right.' Ms Phillipson spoke in support of the Supreme Court ruling as she backed a ban on transgender people using women's toilets. Her support of the verdict was in sharp contrast to remarks she had made on the general election campaign trail last year. Speaking as shadow education secretary last June, she said trans women with penises could use female lavatories under Labour's plans to make it easier to change gender. She said a trans woman who had a gender recognition certificate 'would be using female toilets' if they had not had reassignment surgery. Asked whether her response would 'protect a woman's space', she insisted those changing gender would have gone through 'quite an extensive process'. Labour's wider support of the judgment also marked the latest in a number of significant shifts in its position on transgender rights. It was not until last year that Sir Keir Starmer agreed with Sir Tony Blair when the former prime minister said that a man had a penis and a woman had a vagina. Sir Keir gave a radio interview in which he claimed '99.9 per cent' of women did not have a penis, implying that tens of thousands did. It prompted a backlash from within Labour led by Rosie Duffield, a gender-critical feminist who has since quit the party to sit as an independent MP.
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Nicola Sturgeon's legacy may be defined by Isla Bryson
Nicola Sturgeon has said she was 'like a rabbit caught in the headlights' when asked if double rapist Isla Bryson was a woman. In her new book, the former first minister said she was 'completely blindsided' when the case prompted a public outcry. 'I had no advance warning that the case was pending,' she wrote in Frankly. 'To this day, I do not understand how no one in the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) or Scottish government officialdom thought it important to flag it up to me.' Read more from Unspun: Bryson was convicted at the High Court in Glasgow in 2023 of raping one woman in Clydebank in 2016 and another in Glasgow in 2019. He began identifying as a woman only after being charged and has not legally changed gender. Although the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service expected Bryson to be sent to Barlinnie, the SPS initially moved him to the women's prison at Cornton Vale. It was only after a backlash, and Ms Sturgeon's intervention, that Bryson was transferred to HMP Edinburgh. The row came just weeks after MSPs passed the controversial Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. Although the Bill never became law, the SPS had for years allowed prisoners to self-identify their gender. Which is why nobody flagged it to the first minister. Despite the Bryson scandal, subsequent policy changes, and the Supreme Court case, the SPS continues to house dangerous, biological men in the women's estate. Its post-Bryson 2023 Policy for the Management of Transgender People in Custody states that a transgender woman 'will not be eligible to be considered for admission or transfer to a women's prison' if convicted of serious offences such as murder, assault, robbery, abduction, rape, and sexual harassment. However, the policy includes an exception: the SPS Risk Management Team can approve transfers if there is 'compelling evidence' the prisoner does not present an unacceptable risk. What is unacceptable risk? Research by the Murray Blackburn Mackenzie (MBM) policy collective found that prisoners currently in the women's estate include Alan Baker (also known as Alex Stewart), convicted of murder in 2013 and held in the female unit at Greenock prison. So too is Richard McCabe, also known as Melissa Young, who was convicted of murder in 2014. While on remand at Cornton Vale, they assaulted a female officer, biting her stomach Peter Laing, who now goes by the name Paris Green, was also convicted of murder and torture in 2013. They were still in the female estate in 2024 and recently charged with assaulting a female guard. Do these prisoners represent acceptable risk? The Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC) helped draft the new SPS policy. MBM has repeatedly called on the SHRC to withdraw its submission. In June 2023, they were told their request was being considered. Despite chasing in August and October 2023, they received no reply. As reported in The Herald, they wrote again in April 2025, following the Supreme Court case, renewing their call. Almost three months later, SHRC executive director Jan Savage responded. Part of the delay, she said, was due to the prison service. On May 22, 2025, the SHRC wrote to the SPS asking how it was monitoring the impact of its policy, whether it had published data, if the policy would be reviewed, and if it collected information on sex and gender. More than two months on, the SPS has yet to reply. When asked, an SPS spokesperson told me: 'We value the important role of the Scottish Human Rights Commission and will respond to their correspondence in due course. 'We have received the Supreme Court's judgement and are actively considering its impact.' With Frankly, Ms Sturgeon attempts to define her legacy. The truth is, the chaos in Scotland's public sector, and Scotland's prisons in particular, could well define it for her.
