Nebraska is the latest state to ban transgender students from girls' sports
Advertisement
The measure was first introduced in 2023 by then-freshman Sen. Kathleen Kauth, but failed to advance as lawmakers angrily argued over Kauth's other bill that sought to bar gender-affirming care for transgender minors under the age of 19. An amended version that banned gender-affirming surgery — but not all gender-affirming care — for minors later passed and was enacted that year.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
On Wednesday, Kauth promised to revive her bathroom and locker room ban next year, reiterating her rejection that people can determine their own gender.
'Men are men and women are women,' she said, and urged voters in Riepe's district to pressure him to support it.
Republicans behind the sports ban say it protects women and girls and their ability to fairly compete in sports. Opponents say with so few transgender students seeking to participate in sports, the measure is a solution in search of a problem.
Advertisement
Fewer than 10 transgender students have participated in middle school and high school sports in the state over the past decade, according to the Nebraska School Activities Association.
At least 24 other states have adopted similar bans. President Donald Trump also signed an executive order this year intended to dictate which sports competitions transgender athletes can enter and has battled in court with Maine over that state's allowing transgender athletes in girls' and women's sports.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska denounced the measure.
ACLU Nebraska Executive Director Mindy Rush Chipman said the ban 'slams the door shut' for some transgender students to fully participate in their school communities.
'This ban will only create problems, not solve any,' Rush Chipman said, adding that 'the constant targeting of LGBTQ+ Nebraskans must stop.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Newsom lashes out at universities for agreeing to 'sell their soul' to Trump for federal funding
Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., accused major universities such as Columbia and Brown of "selling their souls" to the Trump administration after agreeing to multimillion-dollar settlements. Several universities had federal research grants cut or frozen either for failing to address antisemitism or for promoting so-called "woke" policies, according to the administration. Though some schools have agreed to pay large settlements to restore funding and close additional investigations, Newsom reiterated that the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) will not follow suit. "UCLA is not going to sell their soul like Harvard or Brown or Penn or Columbia," Newsom said on "Pod Save America" Thursday. "Shame on all of them. We're not. And we're going to fight like hell to protect our democracy, our liberties, our freedoms. I love Republicans. I love Democrats. I don't care what your party affiliation is. I honestly don't. I care about this country and our democracy. I care about the rule of law." He called out Harvard over reports suggesting the university was close to reaching a $500 million settlement to regain access to more than $2.6 billion in federal funding. "And let me make this crystal clear to everyone watching and make it crystal clear to the folks at Harvard," Newsom said. "We will never ever sell our soul to Donald Trump. Harvard, I pray you are listening. How could you? Of all institutions, on tens of billions of dollars, what's the point of your damn endowment if you cannot stand on principle?" While speaking in San Francisco earlier this month, Newsom made a similar declaration, insisting that UCLA would not pay a settlement under his watch. "We're not Brown, we're not Columbia, and I'm not going to be governor if we act like that," Newsom said. "Period. Full stop, I will fight like hell to make sure that doesn't happen." The Trump administration is seeking a $1 billion settlement from UCLA, along with the creation of a $172 million claims fund for alleged Title VII violations under the Civil Rights Act. UCLA has already paid $6 million to settle a lawsuit brought by Jewish students and faculty members over the school's handling of anti-Israel protests, including its failure to stop protesters from setting up what Jewish students and faculty described as a "Jew Exclusion Zone" on campus.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Newsom demands information from Trump after Border Patrol appearance outside his news conference
Gov. Gavin Newsom filed a request Sunday seeking records from the Trump administration to explain why a phalanx of Border Patrol agents showed up outside a news conference held by leading California Democrats last week. Newsom filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security asking for "all documents and records" related to the Aug. 14 Border Patrol operation in downtown Los Angeles, which took place outside the Japanese American National Museum in Little Tokyo. At the news conference, Newsom announced a campaign to seek voter approval to redraw California's congressional maps to boost Democrats' chances of retaking the House and stymieing Trump's agenda in the 2026 midterm elections. "Trump's use of the military and federal law enforcement to try to intimidate his political opponents is yet another dangerous step towards authoritarianism," Newsom posted Sunday on X. "This is an attempt to advance a playbook from the despots he admires in Russia and North Korea." Newsom announced at the press event the 'Election Rigging Response Act" — which would scrap independently drawn congressional maps in favor of those sketched by Democratic strategists in an attempt to counter moves by Republicans in Texas and other GOP-led states to gerrymander their own districts to favor Republicans in the 2026 midterms. Meanwhile, dozens of armed federal agents massed in the adjacent streets wearing masks, helmets and camouflage. Newsom and other leading Democrats, including L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, dismissed the Border Patrol action as an intimidation tactic. In response to questions from The Times on Sunday, Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said the agents were "focused on enforcing the law, not on [Newsom]." McLaughlin said two people were arrested during the Little Tokyo operation. One was a drug trafficker, according to McLaughlin, who said the other was a member of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang that has been a focus of the Trump administration's efforts to use the Alien Enemies Act to speed up deportation efforts. She did not respond to questions about how many agents were deployed or what specific agencies were involved in the Aug. 14 operation. Border Patrol Sector Chief Gregory Bovino, who has been leading the Trump administration's aggressive immigration operations in California, was at the scene and briefly spoke to reporters. McLaughlin did not name either person arrested or respond to a request for further information or evidence of links between the arrests and the Venezuelan gang. "Under President Trump and [Department of Homeland Security] Secretary [Kristi] Noem, if you break the law, you will face the consequences," she wrote in an e-mailed statement. "Criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the U.S.' On Thursday, witnesses at the scene identified one of the men arrested as Angel, a delivery worker who was carrying strawberries when he was captured. 'He was just doing his normal delivery to the courthouse,' said the man's colleague, Carlos Franco. 'It's pretty sad, because I've got to go to work tomorrow, and Angel isn't going to be there.' In the FOIA request, Newsom's legal affairs secretary, David Sapp, called the Border Patrol deployment an "attempt to intimidate the people of California from defending a fair electoral process." In addition to documents related to the planning of the raid, the FOIA request also seeks "any records referencing Governor Newsom or the rally that was scheduled to occur" and communications between federal law enforcement officials and Fox News, which allowed the Trump-friendly media outlet to embed a reporter with Border Patrol that day. Trump's increased use of the military and federal law enforcement against his political rivals has drawn growing concern in recent months. The president deployed the National Guard and U.S. Marines to quell protests against immigration raids in Los Angeles earlier this year. Just last week, Trump sent swarms of federal law enforcement officials to Washington, D.C., to combat what he sees as out-of-control crime, despite the fact that most crime statistics show violence in the nation's capital is at a 30-year low. Although Newsom demanded an answer by early September, the federal government is notoriously slow in responding to FOIA requests and will often delay responses for years. A spokesman for Newsom did not immediately respond to questions on Sunday about what, if any, other legal steps the governor was prepared to take. Voters would have to approve Newsom's plan to redraw the congressional maps in a special election in November. The new maps, drawn by Democratic strategists and lawmakers behind closed doors instead of the independent commission that voters previously chose, would concentrate Republican voters in a few deep-red pockets of the state and eliminate an Inland Empire district long held by the GOP. In total, Democrats would likely pick up five seats in California in the midterms under the redrawn maps, possibly countering or outpacing Republican efforts to tilt their map red in Texas. Other states have already begun to consider redrawing their maps along more partisan lines in response to growing anxieties over the fight to control the House of Representatives in 2026. Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Are we getting a $5000 DOGE dividend or $600 rebate? Fourth stimulus check eligibility
If you're wondering about a fourth stimulus check in 2025 from President Donald Trump or the IRS, here's what to know about eligibility and the reality of it happening. On July 25, Trump floated the idea of a tariff rebate check for American taxpayers in response to questions about all the new tariff revenue being generated, "We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate. But the big thing we want to do is pay down debt. But we're thinking about a rebate." A few days after the president's tariff rebate comments, Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley announced the American Worker Rebate Act of 2025 aimed at sending checks to Americans. Note that a few months back, in February, Trump also said he would consider a plan to pay out a portion of the savings identified by the Department of Government Efficiency in the form of a $5000 dividend check as payback to taxpayers. The DOGE dividend proposal, authored by Azoria investment firm CEO James Fishback, was meant to give back or refund taxpayers a savings from Elon Musk's DOGE related cuts and reductions in government spending. Here's what to know about Trump's two proposals this year, what the amounts would be, qualifications and status. Are we getting a fourth stimulus check in 2025? While speculation about a of $2,000 has surfaced on social media and unverified websites, there has been no official confirmation of any additional economic relief package in 2025 from Congress or the IRS to support this claim. Any such news should be taken with caution as it could be misinformation or attempted fraud. Either of Trump's ideas for a tariff rebate or DOGE dividend this year would be similar to a fourth stimulus check, if approved. Albeit, there are differences between a stimulus check versus a dividend, refund or rebate. By definition, a dividend is a distribution of profits by a corporation to its shareholders and refund is a payment made back to a user that previously paid for something. While a rebate is a partial refund of the purchase price that a consumer paid, often upon meeting certain conditions — more like a discount that is refunded after the purchase versus a discount that is applied at the point of sale. A stimulus check on the other hand, is a direct payment to encourage spending and stimulate the economy by putting money directly into the consumers' hand. Also similar to the stimulus checks sent during the pandemic, these proposals would require congressional approval. What is the American Worker Rebate Act of 2025? Hawley's bill, called the American Worker Rebate Act of 2025, would provide a minimum of $600 per adult and dependent child, or $2,400 for a family of four, according to news officials. The benefit would be reduced by 5% for joint filers with an adusted gross income above $150,000 or single filers earning more than $75,000 individually. According to an analysis from the Budget Lab at Yale released July 28, Trump's tariffs could cost U.S. households an average of $2,400 in 2025 through higher prices passed on from companies paying higher tariff taxes. The Treasury Department said on July 25 that the U.S. government posted a $27 billion surplus in June, following a $316 billion deficit in May. Customs duties totaled approximately $27 billion for the month, up from $23 billion in May and 301% higher than in June 2024. On an annual basis, tariff collections have totaled $113 billion, or 86% more than a year ago. The bill would allow for a larger rebate if the tariff revenue exceeds projections. What is the status of the DOGE dividend check proposal? Fishback announced that he was stepping away from the DOGE dividend check movement after Musk lashed out at the president in June, although he also said he would continue working with the administration "to return savings to taxpayers." The latest update on DOGE dividend came from Fishbacks tweet on June 6, "I believed in Elon Musk's vision to shrink government and make it work better for Americans. I'm proud of the DOGE Dividend proposal I developed and will keep working with the administration to return savings to taxpayers." He added, "The truth is that Elon set expectations that he relayed to the President, me, and the country that he did not come close to fulfilling. That's disappointing, but okay." According to Fishback's proposal, the DOGE dividend check was described as tax refund check to be sent to every taxpaying household, funded exclusively with a portion of the total savings delivered by DOGE. The potential refund would be sent only to households that are net-income taxpayers — people who pay more in taxes than they get back — with lower-income Americans not qualifying for the return, according to news reports. The Pew Research Center cites most Americans who have an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 pay effectively no federal income tax. According to the DOGE website, it cites an estimated $205 billion — approximately $1,273 per individual federal taxpayer — in savings and proof in their "Wall of Receipts." Albeit, only half the amount is itemized thus far, raising doubts about accuracy. Amy Gleason is the acting administrator and head of DOGE. Musk's departure from the federal government will likely do little to change DOGE's work carrying out Trump's vision of downsizing the federal government or eliminating the 'fraud and waste.' Maria Francis is a Pennsylvania-based journalist with the Mid-Atlantic Connect Team. This article originally appeared on Asbury Park Press: How to check your stimulus check status? Trump $600 - $2400 rebate Solve the daily Crossword
