Ohio ‘Given Name Act' proposes strict rules for names, pronouns in schools
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Ohio's 'Parents' Bill of Rights' won't go into effect for two more weeks, but House Republicans are already proposing amendments, including one that would penalize districts that used students' chosen names and pronouns without parent permission.
Reps. Jonathan Newman (R-Troy) and Josh Williams (R-Sylvania Township) introduced House Bill 190 on Monday, which would require public schools to have parent permission to refer to a student by a name or pronoun that differs from what is listed on their birth certificate. Schools that violate the 'Given Name Act' would be denied state funding and open themselves to lawsuits.
Olentangy schools defends LGBTQ+ anti-bullying policies in federal court
The bill also bans public school employees or contractors from requiring students or staff to respect students' chosen names or pronouns. Even with parent permission, schools would not be allowed to subject staff or students to 'adverse action' for declining to use a student's preferred name and pronouns.
Although students older than 18 could personally request to be addressed differently under HB 190, teachers could not. The proposed bill would ban school employees from sharing their pronouns or titles if they differ from what is listed on the employee's personal birth certificate.
After Florida enacted a similar ban in 2023, the state faced lawsuits from transgender and gender variant teachers, including high school teacher Katie Wood. A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that said the state's ban on preferred pronouns violated Wood's First Amendment rights, and a federal court heard oral arguments in October 2024. However, the court withdrew its interest in the case on Feb. 26, before a ruling was issued.
The law would not apply to derivatives, or generally accepted nicknames, of birth names. For instance, if director Spike Lee were an Ohio student, he could be called Shelton or Shel, from his given name Shelton Jackson Lee. However, he would need written permission to be called Spike under HB 190.
Columbus City Schools reverts to birth names for transgender students
The Given Name Act also establishes a complaint system through the Department of Education and Workforce. If the department determines a school district violated the law, the state would then withhold 10% of the school's funding every month until the state determined they were now compliant. The bill also allows families to sue for monetary relief if a district or staff member knowingly violates it.
HB 190 would update the Parents' Bill of Rights, which will go into effect on April 9 and already requires schools to alert parents and guardians if a student requests to go by a name or pronoun that is different from what was assigned at birth. See previous Parents' Bill of Rights coverage in the video player above.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump vs. California is the fight the White House wants
President Trump is getting the fight with California he wants as Democrats in the state criticize his decision to send the National Guard to Los Angeles without local approval to deal with protests surrounding raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The unfolding events hit at the heart of key issues that Trump basks in: immigration and fighting liberal California Democrats. You can also add in law and order, as Trump and his team accuse California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and other local officials of being too soft on demonstrators destroying property and setting cars on fire. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller on Sunday reposted several images meant to convey the chaos in LA, including one showing huge plumes of smoke billowing from a burning vehicle as demonstrators watched, with one with holding Mexican flag. The post read, 'Let's check in on how LAPD's management of the 'protests' is going,' and criticized Newsom's slamming of Trump's decision to send the guard. A second Miller repost was from his White House colleague Taylor Budowich, who sent out a similar video of a masked protestor on a car surrounded by other burning cars and demonstrators in the streets. 'Democrat management,' the post said. Newsom has said California will sue the Trump administration over its deployment of the National Guard, while the White House maintains Trump intervened at the right time to restore law and order and that the violent attacks had already escalated before he stepped in. 'Donald Trump has created the conditions you see on your TV tonight. He's exacerbated the conditions. He's, you know, lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire, ever since he announced he was taking over the National Guard — an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act,' Newsom said on MSNBC. Just a few days ago, Trump was battling negative coverage of his public feud with erstwhile ally Elon Musk. The violence in LA allowed him to rapidly shift gears and put much of the focus on immigration even as his team pushed Congress to pass his signature legislation — which had triggered the battle with Musk. 'The riots in Los Angeles prove that we desperately need more immigration enforcement personnel and resources. America must reverse the invasion unleashed by Joe Biden of millions of unvetted illegal aliens into our country,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on the social platform X, calling for Senate passage of the House-passed 'one, big beautiful bill' with its funding measures for border security. The story even served to bring Musk back into the fold, with the tech mogul sending a number of supportive messages of the president that criticized Newsom and demonstrators. Trump ran on a platform of mass deportations. Since then, ICE raids, arrests of migrants at immigration courts and lawsuits over deportations have been a major part of his first few months in office. His administration has blamed Democrats, especially Biden, for allowing what they call an 'invasion' of migrants coming in at the nation's southern border, and White House briefings have often begun with spotlighting a deported migrant who committed a crime in the U.S. The images of masked demonstrators with Mexican flags falls right into this argument. That the protests are in California is also good for Trump. Trump has flirted with the idea of fining or nixing federal funding for the state, lashing out earlier this month after a transgender athlete was allowed to compete and win at a high school track and field meet. He also blamed Newsom, who is widely considered to be eying a presidential bid, for the wildfires that raged in the Los Angeles area in January and made his first trip as president to California to meet with him and survey damage. Newsom then visited Trump at the White House in February about aid for wildfire victims. The White House is now blaming Newsom for the protests in Los Angeles, bashing him for suing the administration instead of focusing on solutions. 'Gavin Newsom's feckless leadership is directly responsible for the lawless riots and violent attacks on law enforcement in Los Angeles. Instead of filing baseless lawsuits meant to score political points with his left-wing base, Newsom should focus on protecting Americans by restoring law and order to his state,' White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said. Trump on Sunday didn't rule out using the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to deploy the military and federalize the National Guard in the event of an insurrection. He considered invoking the law in his first term during the 2020 protests over police brutality, but officials like former Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back at the time. 'We're going to have troops everywhere. We're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart like it was under Biden and his auto pen,' Trump said Sunday. The president also said that if California officials stand in the way of federal officials deporting migrants, they will face federal charges. 'We're just going to see what happens. If we think there's a serious insurrection … we're going to have law and order,' he said. California Democrats are responding to Trump by calling on residents to not turn to violence while protesting, arguing that the president's move to bring in the National Guard was meant to provoke the chaos. 'Angelenos — don't engage in violence and chaos. Don't give the administration what they want,' Mayor Karen Bass said on X. Similarly, Newsom warned other states about Trump federalizing the National Guard and accused him of escalating the situation. 'This is exactly what Donald Trump wanted,' Newsom said on X. 'He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard. The order he signed doesn't just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing. We're suing him.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
ActBlue fires back at GOP investigation, saying it appears unconstitutional and partisan
ActBlue is fighting back against a House Republican investigation into its workings, saying the probe appears to have become an unconstitutional abuse of power to help the White House. The Democratic online fundraising platform said Monday in a letter obtained by POLITICO that it was reevaluating whether to cooperate with the ongoing congressional investigation into fraud on its platform in light of President Donald Trump's executive action to investigate potential foreign contributions on ActBlue and House Republicans' public statements supporting the White House. 'If the Committees are now working to gather information on behalf of Department of Justice prosecutors, rather than for legitimate legislative purposes, that would fundamentally transform the nature of your investigation — and violate ActBlue's constitutional rights,' ActBlue's lawyers wrote in the letter Monday to GOP Reps. Jim Jordan, James Comer and Bryan Steil. The allegations are an escalation in the conflict between House Republicans and ActBlue, the behemoth Democratic fundraising platform that has long been in GOP crosshairs as it has helped the left build a massive fundraising advantage. ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones told POLITICO last month that ActBlue believes the platform has 'nothing to hide' but needs to better communicate its role in light of the attacks. In the letter, lawyers representing ActBlue ask the congressional committees investigating the platform to clarify the purpose of their work. They argue public statements from Jordan, Comer and Steil indicate they are seeking to help the Trump Justice Department's separate investigation into ActBlue, rather than carry out congressional oversight. And they note that the "selective focus" of the investigation does not appear to include WinRed, the GOP's primary online fundraising counterpart — and thus may be intended to hurt Democrats, not provide legitimate oversight of American elections. 'The Committees' selective focus on ActBlue also suggests that the investigation may be a partisan effort directed at harming political opponents rather than gathering facts to assist in lawmaking efforts,' the letter reads. 'Such an action would raise substantial First Amendment concerns.' Spokespeople for the GOP committees investigating ActBlue did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday afternoon. A spokesperson for ActBlue also did not immediately comment. The letter comes as the Trump administration is also going after ActBlue. Trump signed a memorandum in April ordering Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate the potential use of foreign 'straw' donations in online fundraising, citing concerns about foreign influence in elections based in part on the work of the GOP-led congressional committees. ActBlue was the only platform named in the order. The memorandum calls for Bondi to report back in 90 days, which would be late July. Under federal law, only U.S. citizens and green card holders can give to campaigns and political action committees. Republicans have long argued that ActBlue, which processed billions of dollars in donations for Democrats last year, is not strict enough in weeding out potential foreign contributions. ActBlue has countered that it has processes to catch illegal donation attempts and that similar challenges exist on other platforms, including WinRed. The platform's lawyers also suggested that ActBlue's further cooperation with the congressional probes could depend on the extent of the committees' work with the Justice Department. 'In light of your public statements, it is essential that we receive more information about your agreement to coordinate the Committees' activities with the Executive Branch, so that ActBlue may properly evaluate its ongoing efforts to cooperate with the Committees,' the platform's lawyers wrote. ActBlue previously turned over thousands of pages of internal documents to the committees, some voluntarily, and then later under subpoena. The committees released an interim report in April that cited cases of fraud identified in the ActBlue documents as a means to argue that the platform had an 'unserious' approach to fraud prevention.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
In looming Hegseth hearings, Republicans may air their budget peeves
The first time Pete Hegseth testified before Congress the hardest questions he faced were from Democrats who accused him of sexual and alcohol abuse — both of which he denied as 'anonymous smears.' Now, as America's defense secretary returns to Capitol Hill for a week of testimony, he's likely to get sharper questioning from his own party. After five months atop the Pentagon, Hegseth has dismissed top U.S. officers, slashed the Defense Department's workforce and fired much of his own staff. For a defense secretary confirmed by the narrowest margin possible, the rapid changes have concerned even some Republican members of Congress. 'This is it. This is really the first oversight' of Hegseth's time as secretary, said Mark Montgomery, a retired rear admiral and former Senate Armed Services Committee aide. Alongside Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, Hegseth will testify in multiple hearings focused on defense spending. But in an unusual twist, these hearings will occur without the Pentagon actually releasing its budget request, which is already months late. As in his January hearing, Hegseth will likely face blistering criticism from Democrats aghast at his handling of the Defense Department — from sharing sensitive attack plans on a group chat to tasking the U.S. military with more missions on American soil. But he may also face hard questions from Republicans, many of whom have publicly chafed at the administration's plans for military spending. Hegseth returns to Capitol Hill to defend Trump's defense budget plan In May, the administration asked Congress for a $892.6 billion base defense budget, of which around $850 billion would go to the Pentagon. The number amounts to a cut when accounting for inflation. 'It's going to be hard to say you're actually putting forward a 'Peace through Strength' policy when you're asking for less money than your predecessors projected,' said Elaine McCusker, a top official in the Pentagon's comptroller office during the first Trump administration. Per the scarce budget documents already released by the administration, the Pentagon's procurement account is poised for a major cut — almost $20 billion less than the Biden Pentagon had projected, McCusker said. The drop could harm some of the administration's top priorities, such as the Golden Dome missile defense system and investments in shipbuilding, both of which are also popular in Congress. 'It appears the Trump administration's [fiscal year 2026] defense budget request will double down on the Biden administration's material neglect for the glaring national security threats challenges about which they speak with great alarm,' chair of the Senate appropriations subcommittee on defense Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., wrote in a May statement. Both McConnell and Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted against Hegseth's confirmation. Many top Republicans in Congress are calling for the kind of military buildup the administration is asking of its European and Asian allies — closer to 5% of GDP spent on defense. The administration has defended its budget by saying it's not the only military spending planned for this year. Congress is also debating a massive party-line bill that would include $150 billion for defense, spread over four years. This bill includes much of the money slated for top priority weapons purchases, like missile defense and warships. 'This budget provides that level [of spending] while ensuring that only Republican-votes are needed by using reconciliation to secure those increases without Democrats insisting on increasing wasteful government,' Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought posted on X in May. Still, such supplemental defense bills haven't been counted as part of the defense budget in the past and would introduce new uncertainty. Pentagon officials plan the funding for major weapons programs years into the future to make sure funding is predictable. If, say, Golden Dome is only funded in a stand-alone spending bill, then there's no guarantee it will get more money in the future. 'The appropriate defense budget isn't that you give it a huge chunk of change but that you grow it year over year,' Montgomery said. Privately, some Republicans are also concerned about the increased use of U.S. forces on American soil to support immigration enforcement. Some 9,000 active-duty troops have either been deployed to the southern border or are approved to do so. Such missions are under even higher scrutiny after the protests in Los Angeles against the Trump administration's recent deportations in the city. Over the weekend, Trump called up 2,000 National Guard troops to protect officials carrying out the mission. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, has decried the choice and said he plans to sue for their removal. Meanwhile, U.S. Northern Command posted on X Sunday that parts of an infantry brigade team from the California National Guard have already begun deploying to Los Angeles. Hegseth, who has said active duty Marines may follow, shared the post from his personal account.
