CA lawmaker demands public records following firing of Chris Kluwe
HUNTINGTON BEACH, Calif. - California Rep. Dave Min is calling on Huntington Beach educators to release public records about First Amendment concerns following the firing of former NFL player Chris Kluwe.
The backstory
The former UCLA and Minnesota Vikings punter was fired from his coaching job at Edison High School days after he was arrested for protesting a 'MAGA' plaque at the Huntington Beach City Council meeting.
PREVIOUS COVERAGE:
Former NFL player Chris Kluwe fired from coaching job after protesting MAGA
Former NFL player Chris Kluwe arrested for protesting 'MAGA' plaque at Huntington Beach City Council meeting
Kluwe said he was called into a meeting with Edison's athletic director and assistant principal of supervision and was fired after the school felt they received "too much attention" following his outburst during the city council meeting.
Kluwe was arrested in a show of civil disobedience at the Feb. 18 Huntington Beach City Council meeting out of what he called frustration with how Democratic leaders have responded to Trump's second term.
What they're saying
More than a month after his arrest and firing, Rep. Min sent a new letter to Edison High School Principal Daniel Morris and Huntington Beach Union High School District Superintendent Dr. Carolee Ogata, requesting they provide public records related to the potential First Amendment violations in the firing of Kluwe.
"I took an oath to 'support and defend' the Constitution and the rights it grants to all Americans. As the Trump administration relentlessly attacks the Constitution, it is our responsibility to stand up for the rule of law and protect free speech in Orange County," Min said.
Min said a previous letter was left unanswered by Superintendent Ogata and Principal Morris. He said if they do not provide a written response by April 5, he'll be forced to elevate the situation and seek enforcement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
8 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump asks Supreme Court to green light Education Department firings
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to give the go-ahead to carry out a plan to fire almost 40 percent of the Education Department's workforce. In an emergency appeal filed Friday morning, Solicitor General John Sauer asked the high court to lift a preliminary injunction a federal judge in Boston issued last month after determining that such sweeping staffing cuts would cripple the agency's ability to carry out functions assigned to it by Congress. While Trump has vowed to eliminate the Education Department, Sauer insisted that the proposed, wide-ranging reductions in force target 'inefficiency' and are not an attempt to kneecap the agency as the president advocates for its demise. Sauer said Boston-based U.S. District Judge Myong Joun's order was part of a pattern of federal judges overstepping their proper role and second-guessing executive branch decisions. The Constitution 'does not empower district courts to presume that all 1,400 employees must be reinstated to their previous jobs and functions based on anecdotal speculation about impairment of some of the Department's services,' Sauer wrote, adding: 'The Department remains committed to implementing its statutorily mandated functions.' Joun issued the injunction May 22 in connection with lawsuits brought by Democratic-led states, the Somerville, Massachusetts, public school system and several labor unions. Noting that Trump has repeatedly vowed to shutter the Education Department 'immediately,' the Biden appointee concluded that the layoffs amounted to 'an attempt … to shut down the Department without Congressional approval.' The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block Joun's order, although the administration's appeal remains pending. In April, the Supreme Court stepped in at the administration's request to block an order Joun issued in a separate lawsuit involving the Education Department. That directive required the agency to keep funding certain teaching-related grants that Trump appointees had sought to terminate. Four of the high court's nine justices dissented from the stay blocking Joun's order in that case. In an emergency appeal already pending at the Supreme Court, the Trump administration is trying to lift a block a federal judge in San Francisco issued on tens of thousands of layoffs at all major federal agencies except for the Education Department.
Associated Press
8 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Transgender troops face a deadline and a difficult decision: Stay or go?
WASHINGTON (AP) — As transgender service members face a deadline to leave the U.S. military, hundreds are taking the financial bonus to depart voluntarily. But others say they will stay and fight. For many, it is a wrenching decision to end a career they love, and leave units they have led or worked with for years. And they are angry they are being forced out by the Trump administration's renewed ban on transgender troops. Active duty service members had until Friday to identify themselves and begin to leave the military voluntarily, while the National Guard and Reserve have until July 7. Then the military will begin involuntary separations. Friday's deadline comes during Pride Month and as the Trump administration targets diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, saying it's aiming to scrub the military of 'wokeness' and reestablishing a 'warrior ethos.' 'They're tired of the rollercoaster. They just want to go,' said one transgender service member, who plans to retire. 'It's exhausting.' For others, it's a call to arms. 'I'm choosing to stay in and fight,' a noncommissioned officer in the Air Force said. 'My service is based on merit, and I've earned that merit.' The troops, who mainly spoke on condition of anonymity because they fear reprisals, said being forced to decide is frustrating. They say it's a personal choice based on individual and family situations, including whether they would get an infusion of cash or possibly wind up owing the government money. 'I'm very disappointed,' a transgender Marine said. 'I've outperformed, I have a spotless record. I'm at the top of every fitness report. I'm being pushed out while I know others are barely scraping by.' Some transgender troops decide to leave based on finances Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said this is President Donald Trump's directive and what America voted for. The Pentagon, he said, is 'leaving wokeness & weakness behind' and that includes 'no more dudes in dresses.' Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, a veteran, and 22 other Democratic senators have written to Hegseth urging him to allow transgender troops to keep serving honorably. Already, more than 1,000 service members have voluntarily identified themselves as transgender and are slated to begin leaving, according to rough Defense Department estimates. Defense officials say there are about 4,240 active duty transgender troops but acknowledge the numbers are fuzzy. For many, the decision is financial. Those who voluntarily leave will get double the amount of separation pay they would normally receive and won't have to return bonuses or tuition costs. Those who refuse to go could be forced to repay reenlistment or other bonuses as high as $50,000. That was the tipping point for Roni Ferrell, an Army specialist at Joint Base Lewis-McChord near Tacoma, Washington. Ferrell, 28, lives on base with her wife and two children and had planned to stay in the Army for at least another decade. But she said she felt 'backed into a corner' to sign the voluntary separation agreement, fearing she would have to repay an $18,500 reenlistment bonus. 'My commander basically said it was my only option in order to make sure my kids are taken care of,' Ferrell said. The Marine, who has served for more than 25 years, said she had planned to stay and fight, but changed her mind. Lawyers, she said, told her an involuntary separation would put a code in her record saying she was forced to leave 'in the interests of national security.' That designation, she said, could mean those involuntarily separated could lose their security clearances, hurting future job prospects. In a statement Friday, a defense official said the code 'is not intended' to trigger clearance revocations and that gender dysphoria is not a security reporting requirement, according to the director of national intelligence. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Cynthia Cheng-Wun Weaver, senior director of litigation for Human Rights Campaign, said it's important for troops to talk with judge advocates general in their services to ensure they understand the different procedures being implemented. Other transgender troops plan to stay despite the ban The Air Force service member and a transgender officer in the Army National Guard both said they plan to stay and fight. Lawsuits over the ban continue and could change or block the policy. For troops involved in the court battles as plaintiffs, leaving voluntarily now would likely hurt their standing in the case. For others, it's simply dedication to their career. 'I've really embraced military culture, and it's embraced me,' the Air Force member said. 'It's not about money. It's the career that I love.' The Guard soldier echoed that sentiment, saying he will stay on 'because it is important to me to serve. Frankly, I'm good at it, I'm well trained so I want to continue.' Others without bonuses to repay or who have been in the military only a short while and won't get much in separation bonus pay may opt to stay and see what happens. National Guard troops face a particular problem National Guard members who are heading to their monthly drill weekend or annual two-week drill in June could be required to go but serve as the gender they were assigned at birth. That means they would have to wear uniforms and haircuts of that gender, use that bathroom and be referred to as 'sir' or 'ma'am' based on that gender. For many, that could be close to impossible and create uncomfortable situations. 'If I were to show up to drill this weekend, I'd be expected to use all female facilities, I would be expected to wear a woman's uniform,' said the Army Guard officer, who transitioned to male about five years ago and says others in his unit know him as a man. 'I don't look like a woman. I don't feel like a woman. It would be disruptive to good order and discipline for me to show up and to tell my soldiers, you have to call me 'ma'am' now.' It's not clear if Guard units are handling it all the same way, and it could be up to individual states or commanders. Some may allow troops to postpone the drill or go on administrative leave. What happens next for transgender troops? The service members interviewed by The Associated Press said they don't know what will happen once the deadline passes to leave voluntarily. Some believe that unit commanders will quickly single people out and start involuntary separations. Others say the process is vague, may involve medical review boards and could take months. The defense official said Friday that as the Pentagon takes these steps, it 'will treat our service members with dignity and respect.' Under Hegseth's directive, military commanders will be told to identify troops with gender dysphoria — when a person's biological sex does not match their gender identity — and send them to get medical checks to force them out of the service, defense officials have said. The order relies on routine annual health checks — so it could be months before that evaluation is scheduled. 'My real big sticking point is that this administration's whole push is to reform this country based around merit, and that gender, race, etc., should have no factor in hiring,' the Air Force service member said. 'If that's true, I'm solely being removed for my gender, and merit is no longer a factor.' ___ Associated Press writer R.J. Rico in Atlanta contributed to this report.
The Intercept
9 minutes ago
- The Intercept
Democrats Hate Their Own Party. The People Can Take It Back.
At a recent rally at U.S. Steel in Pennsylvania, Donald Trump stood in front of a row of workers in hard hats and safety vests and proclaimed, 'We're right now on the verge of passing the largest working class tax cuts in American history.' He framed his 'Big Beautiful Bill' — a massive tax cut for the wealthy — as a blue-collar blessing. The sleight of hand is classic Trump, and what makes his appeal to voters enduring. 'The Republican Party is building the multiracial working class coalition that the Democrats have always said that they want to build,' says David Sirota, founder of The Lever and a former Bernie Sanders speechwriter. This week on The Intercept Briefing, host Jordan Uhl speaks to Sirota and politics reporter Jessica Washington about how Trump has successfully used culture-war grievances to win over working-class voters, and why the Democratic Party continues to hemorrhage support. The episode also features Ilyse Hogue, the former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America and the co-creator of a new $20 million project called Speaking With American Men, or SAM. The initiative aims to understand — and win back — young male voters who've drifted to the right. ' A lot of what we heard from people is that they feel invisible to the Democratic coalition,' she says. The plan has sparked skepticism, but Houge says the data is clear: 'We're losing young men of every race, ethnicity, educational background, and economic class in every state we looked at.' ' Trump is constantly trying to exploit and demagogue any issue,' Sirota explains, 'and really ramrod any issue into a culture war battle where he portrays himself as the Archie Bunker defender of middle America — silent America's values — and portrays Democrats as mostly interested in talking about advocating for and protecting those who are not part of so-called middle America.' According to Hogue, voters SAM have spoken to say, ' They want affordable housing. They want access to health care. They actually feel like Democrats can't get it done.' Sirota believes it's not just lack of faith in their ability to get it done. 'The average rank-and-file Democratic voter does not like the Democratic Party, does not like the Democratic leadership,' says Sirota. And that, he argues, is an opening for change. 'You cannot serve the donors and the voters simultaneously.' Washington, who has covered the SAM initiative and broader trends in the Democratic politics, points to a central and persistent contradiction. 'You can't serve two masters,' she says. 'You cannot serve the donors and the voters simultaneously. You cannot serve the average American and the person who has $100 million in the exact same way.' If Democrats want to stop hemorrhaging support, particularly among disillusioned voters and younger men, they'll need to do more than tweak their messaging. They'll need to pick a side — and start naming villains. As Sirota argues, ' Economic populism is not just the government will strengthen or make more robust the safety net, but that the economic powers and villains in the economy will be limited in their power.' You can hear the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
