South Dakota governor signs anti-transgender bathroom bill
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — A new law in South Dakota will restrict transgender people's use of communal facilities in public schools and state-owned buildings starting July 1.
Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden signed bill HB 1259 into law on Friday, which prohibits transgender people from using changing rooms and restrooms that align with their gender identity. The bill also allows people who encounter transgender people in these facilities to seek declaratory and injunctive relief against the school or state if officials did not take reasonable steps to prevent the transgender person from using that facility.
'South Dakota is a place where common-sense values remain common,' Rhoden said in a statement, adding that the bill promotes 'freedom from the 'woke' agenda like what has happened in too many other places.'
This is the first time South Dakota has had a state law restricting transgender people's bathroom access, thanks to the overwhelmingly conservative state legislature this session. A bill had previously passed through both chambers of the state legislature in 2016 before it was vetoed by then Gov. Dennis Daugaard.
Samantha Chapman, advocacy manager at the ACLU of South Dakota, said the organization is exploring its options against the law.
'This is a really painful law,' Chapman said. 'It's really disheartening and kind of heartbreaking, frankly, to see Rhoden take this position and sign this bill into law."
South Dakota is at least the 13th state to adopt a law barring transgender girls and women from girls and women's bathrooms at public schools, and in some cases other government facilities. A similar measure was sent Thursday to the governor in Tennessee; a bill is also on the governor's desk in Montana.
Most of the bans in other states face court challenges, but those haven't had final rulings. Courts have struck down some school district-level bathroom bans across the country. But this week, a federal appeals panel ruled 3-0 that a district judge was not wrong to allow Idaho's ban to be enforced while the case is considered.
Since he returned to office in January, President Donald Trump has signed a series of executive orders intended to curtail the rights of transgender people. President Joe Biden's administration had sought to apply the federal barring of gender discrimination at schools to gender identity, but the courts put the brakes on that.
___
Associated Press writer Geoff Mulvihill contributed from Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
33 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
2 women marry in Mexico's embassy in Guatemala fueling a debate over same-sex marriage
GUATEMALA CITY (AP) — Two Mexican women were married inside the grounds of Mexico's embassy in Guatemala on Friday, sparking anger in a nation that doesn't recognize same-sex marriage and debate over diplomatic sovereignty. The ceremony held in the embassy gardens was intended to celebrate Pride Month , which is celebrated every June, and the consulate said the marriage marked a step toward inclusion, respect and equality for all. 'We celebrate love without borders,' wrote the embassy in a post on the social media platform X. 'This is the first civil wedding of a same-sex couple at the Embassy of Mexico in Guatemala. It's a right granted to all individuals when both are Mexican citizens.' Shortly after, the ceremony sparked an outcry among conservative politicians in Guatemala, a largely Catholic country and one of a handful in Latin America that still doesn't recognize same-sex marriages. While such marriages aren't explicitly prohibited, Guatemalan law only refers to unions between a man and a woman. Allan Rodríguez, the head of the VAMOS party bloc and ally of former president Alejandro Giammattei, was among those to reject the wedding, writing in a statement that 'although the act may be protected under external jurisdictions, it clearly contradicts Guatemala's current legal framework.' According to the congressman, the properties where embassies are located 'are not foreign territory; they merely enjoy diplomatic privileges' and therefore are not a part of the Mexican state. He claimed considering them as such would 'violate constitutional principles of sovereignty, territorial unity, and the rule of law.' Rodríguez, a former president of Congress, is sanctioned by the United States for obstructing anti-corruption efforts and undermining democracy in Guatemala. The office of progressive President Bernardo Arévalo said that under international law embassies like Mexico's 'have territorial immunity and operate under the jurisdiction of the state they represent.' 'In this case, it is an activity carried out by the Mexican Consulate in Guatemala and aimed at Mexican citizens. Therefore, it is exclusively the responsibility of the Government of Mexico, through its diplomatic representation, to comment or speak on the matter,' the embassy statement said. Still, debate only continued on, with Elmer Palencia, a congressman for the VALOR party, created by the daughter of a former dictator, called the marriage, 'not an act of inclusion, but a provocation.' 'Out of respect for the host country, Mexico should refrain from that narrative. Guatemalan sovereignty and social institutions deserve that respect,' he said. Constitutional lawyer Edgar Ortíz contradicted the conservative politicians, saying the marriage doesn't violate Guatemala's sovereignty and complies with the Vienna Convention, which establishes that what happens on diplomatic premises 'are not subject to the host state's jurisdiction.' He noted that Guatemala's constitution establishes that the country will govern following international principles. 'In no way are Guatemala's laws being altered; the effects of this marriage will occur in Mexico, which does recognize same-sex marriage,' he said. 'Rather,' he added, 'it is the Guatemalan lawmakers who are violating sovereignty, by interfering in Mexico's affairs and trying to tell them what they can or cannot do. That seems far more discourteous.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court won't reconsider ruling that Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll $5M in sex abuse case
NEW YORK (AP) — A federal appeals court won't reconsider its ruling upholding a $5 million civil judgment against President Donald Trump in a civil lawsuit alleging he sexually abused a writer in a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s. In an 8-2 vote Friday, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump's petition for the full appellate court to rehear arguments in his challenge to the jury's finding that he sexually abused advice columnist E. Jean Carroll and defamed her with comments he made in October 2022. Carroll testified at a 2023 trial that Trump turned a friendly encounter in spring 1996 into a violent attack after they playfully entered the store's dressing room. A three-judge panel of the appeals court upheld the verdict in December, rejecting Trump's claims that trial Judge Lewis A. Kaplan's decisions spoiled the trial, including allowing two other Trump sexual abuse accusers to testify. The women said Trump committed similar acts against them in the 1970s and in 2005. Trump denied all three women's allegations. In an opinion Friday, four judges voting to reject rehearing wrote: 'Simply re-litigating a case is not an appropriate use' of the process. 'In those rare instances in which a case warrants our collective consideration, it is almost always because it involves a question of exceptional importance,' or a conflict between precedent and the appellate panel's opinion, Judges Myrna Pérez, Eunice C. Lee, Beth Robinson and Sarah A.L. Merriam wrote. All four were appointed by President Joe Biden, Trump's one-time Democratic rival. The two dissenting judges, Trump appointees, Steven J. Menashi and Michael H. Park, wrote that the trial 'consisted of a series of indefensible evidentiary rulings.' 'The result was a jury verdict based on impermissible character evidence and few reliable facts,' they wrote. 'No one can have any confidence that the jury would have returned the same verdict if the normal rules of evidence had been applied.' Carroll's lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said in a statement: 'E. Jean Carroll is very pleased with today's decision.' 'Although President Trump continues to try every possible maneuver to challenge the findings of two separate juries, those efforts have failed. He remains liable for sexual assault and defamation,' said Kaplan, who is not related to the judge. Trump skipped the trial after repeatedly denying the attack ever happened. He briefly testified at a follow-up defamation trial last year that resulted in an $83.3 million award. The second trial resulted from comments then-President Trump made in 2019 after Carroll first made the accusations publicly in a memoir. Kaplan presided over both trials and instructed the second jury to accept the first jury's finding that Trump had sexually abused Carroll. Arguments in that appeal are set for June 24. The Associated Press does not identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Carroll has done. ___
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Congressman curses fellow lawmaker on House floor
WASHINGTON (NEXSTAR) – New York Democratic Congressman John Mannion cursed out Republican Congressman Mike Lawler on the House floor, Thursday. Video caught the congressman shouting as the rest of the House floor fell silent 'I said it loud enough for him to hear. I did, and he turned to me and then you see the exchange that occurred,' said Mannion. The congressman's outburst came shortly after California Senator Alex Padilla was forced out of a news conference in Los Angeles and handcuffed. Mannion defended his actions saying Republicans, like Lawler, are letting the president and the administration walk over the Constitution. 'He's not standing up to the president. He is ceding his authority, along with the other Republicans, to the president, as is the speaker of the House,' said Mannion. Todd Belt with George Washington University says the country is reaching a boiling point as these aren't the usual things lawmakers would say to each other. 'Tempers are really flaring up over what's going on with these Ice raids, and how members of Congress are being arrested and thrown to the ground and handcuffed,' said Belt. Belt says this could be the start of more to come on the House or Senate floor. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
