In states, some Democrats back anti-trans bills
LEVITTOWN, Penn. — James Malone's victory in a Pennsylvania special election this year was a Democratic triumph. The small-town mayor broke the GOP's grip on Lancaster County, flipping a seat that Donald Trump had carried by 15 points. Gov. Josh Shapiro, who campaigned for Malone, thanked Pennsylvanians for rejecting 'the extremism and division coming out of DC.'
Last week, shortly after being sworn in, Malone voted with four other Democrats and every Republican for the Save Women's Sports Act. Like legislation that had passed in the US House, and in dozens of other states, it limited female sports from kindergarten through college to 'biological females.' Malone had told constituents that he planned to vote for it, and LGBTQ rights groups had urged him to reconsider, but it passed easily.
'This draws into question whether Pennsylvania remains a safe place for the transgender community,' said David Moore, the founder of the Pennsylvania Equality Project, an LGBTQ rights group that opposed the bill. 'If Democrats back away at the state level from defending the community, we have to ask whether anybody is actively supporting us in a way that protects and preserves our rights.'
The Trump administration is enforcing a binary definition of sex and gender, reversing pro-trans Biden-era policies, from the military to the locker room. In Congress, just two Democrats, both moderates from Republican-trending seats, have voted with them, supporting legislation to bar transgender athletes from women's sports.
But in the states, a growing number of Democratic state legislators have supported Republican-led bills. They've been condemned by pro-LGBTQ+ groups, and rarely explained their votes. And they've been given some space by their party.
'I think every member's got to make their own decisions about what they're going to do,' Pennsylvania Democratic Party chairman Sharif Street, a state senator from Philadelphia, told Semafor after a Democratic town hall here. Asked if senators who voted for the bill might lose resources from the party, Street repeated that 'every member has got to make their own decision.'
The momentum for anti-trans legislation in the states grew throughout the Biden presidency, and picked up once his successor began changing federal policy. Legislators have picked up Democratic votes along the way.
In Michigan, eight House Democrats voted for a Republican resolution that urged the state's high school athletics associations to keep trans athletes out of women's sports. In New York, where Democrats hold solid majorities in the state legislature, three of their senators voted to advance a bill to bar 'biologically male students at birth' from competing with women.
None of those Democrats explained their votes. In Pennsylvania, just one of the senators who supported the Save Women's Sports Act explained why on the floor: Lisa Boscola, whose Lehigh Valley seat moved toward Trump last year.
'Separating biological males and females for sports, especially after puberty, is necessary for fairness,' said Boscola in her floor speech. 'What's frustrating me more than anything is that each side of this issue argues it's all or nothing. I do not see it that way.'
National and state Democrats have debated how much heterodoxy they can accept on these sorts of bills. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), the first openly transgender member of Congress, has talked with colleagues about opening a 'big tent' for Democrats who might disagree with them on gender.
'You have to allow people to grow,' McBride told Semafor last year. 'You have to create space for people to grow. And the fact that there is still room for growth for some people does not make them evil.'
Some Democrats who've backed Republican bills have gotten rough receptions from party activists. But they have not been kicked out of the tent.
Just two of McBride's colleagues voted for the federal version of a 'women's sports' bill this year; one of them, Rep. Henry Cuellar, faced a potential condemnation from Texas Democrats, which mentioned that vote among the reasons for the party to cut him off. Last week, the party killed the condemnation resolution.
After last year's elections, when Republicans spent more than $215 million on transgender-focused ads against Democrats, the GOP has grown confident that any legislation about this is an effective wedge. There have been setbacks, especially in Montana, where a coalition of Democrats and libertarian Republicans have blocked bills that would punish public drag shows and remove children from their parents' homes if the children identified as transgender. But where the GOP has a majority — including Montana — the sports bills have passed.
'The support of five Democrat senators of the Save Women's Sports Act shows the bipartisan commonsense nature of the legislation,' said Pennsylvania Sen. Judy Ward, one of the bill's GOP sponsors, in a statement to Semafor. 'By voting for the legislation, those Democrat members stood with me, my Republican colleagues, female athletes, and the majority of Pennsylvanians to ensure that women's rights to fair and safe competition are protected.'
Pennsylvania Democrats, who control the state House, are not expected to take up the sports bill. Shawn Thierry, a former Texas Democratic legislator who voted with Republicans on gender bills, said that her former party needed to allow more dissent. (Thierry jumped to the GOP after losing her primary last year.)
'I commend any Democrat elected official who is willing to take a principled stand on this issue to protect children,' Thierry told Semafor. 'However, it takes more than just pushing a button to take a vote and then skulking away and hoping no one noticed. You have to speak out, if you truly believe in something.'
There are some signs of voter fatigue about anti-transgender legislation. On Tuesday, Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert lost to Democratic challenger John Ewing Jr in a historic upset; a pro-Stothert PAC had run ads and mailers accusing him of supporting 'transition surgeries for minors' and 'men in girls' sports.'
Ewing had never taken a position on the sports issue, which is moving through the Senate in Lincoln after a Democratic filibuster stopped it last year. Stothert's ads instead linked him to 'radicals' who opposed sex-based restrictions on sports and public spaces, a common tactic that takes advantage of the progressive views of most Democratic political groups.
'We need to understand this as a victory against trans hate and discrimination — it's what otherwise moderate Mayor Jean Stothert made the entire end of her campaign about,' wrote Nebraska state Sen. Megan Hunt on X. 'Regular Americans don't react to or receive the call to trans panic. Enough. We are speaking to the future.'
The average Democratic view of anti-trans politics is somewhere between Hunt and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Both expect a backlash to the Republican focus on this. Hunt says the backlash is here; Newsom suggests that it's coming but that letting trans women play in women's sports is 'deeply unfair.'
Newsom, whose podcast has worked through his confusion with how Democrats lost last year, has a lot of quiet company. According to the Pew Research Center's tracking, 45% of self-identified Democrats now believe that athletes should 'compete on teams that match their sex at birth,' up from 37% in 2022.
That doesn't mean 45% of Democrats want legislation to mandate that, taking the choice away from schools and parents. But some of their members in conservative districts are being forced, by Republicans, to make a choice. They're choosing to vote against the position of every LGBTQ equality group, and the last Democratic president.
You can expect Republicans to keep testing how many Democrats they can pull away on these votes. It's harder to predict how Democrats will react, as advocates worry that they can't count 100% on support from their party.
For NPR, Sam Gringlas on how Georgia Democrats responded to this session's anti-trans legislation: Some aye votes, and a walkout.
At the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, J. Miles Coleman the Omaha mayoral election, and Ewing's upset win.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What the Trump-Musk Feud Means for SpaceX and NASA
The U.S. government relies on SpaceX to support NASA and other agencies, and the company has received more $20 billion in federal contracts for it. As Musk and Trump threaten to cut ties, here's what that would mean for the U.S.'s space ambitions.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DHS wants National Guard to search for and transport unaccompanied migrant children
A Department of Homeland Security request for 21,000 National Guard troops to support "expansive interior immigration enforcement operations" includes a call for troops to search for unaccompanied children in some cases and transport them between states, three sources briefed on the plan tell NBC News. Having National Guard troops perform such tasks, which are not explained in detail in the DHS request, has prompted concern among Democrats in Congress and some military and law enforcement officials. The tasks are laid out in a May 9th Request for Assistance from the Department of Homeland Security to the Pentagon. The document states that, 'this represents the first formal request by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for the deployment of National Guard personnel in support of interior immigration enforcement operations.' The request calls for National Guard troops to be used for 'Search and Rescue for UACs [Unaccompanied Alien Children] in remote or hostile terrain,' and 'Intra- and inter-state transport of detainees/ unaccompanied alien children (UACs)," without clearly explaining what that would entail. Most of the troops, about 10,000, would be used for transporting detained individuals, the DHS said. Roughly 2,500 troops would be used for detention support but the document does not specify where. Another 1,000 troops would be assigned to administrative support, such as processing detainees. The request also asks for up to 3,500 troops to 'Attempt to Locate — Fugitives' and to conduct 'surveillance and canvassing missions,' as well as 'night operations and rural interdictions.' It also asks for support for ICE in 'joint task force operations for absconder/fugitive tracking,' according to the three sources familiar with the plans. NPR first reported the details of the DHS request. Democrats in Congress and military and law enforcement officials have expressed concern about the use of National Guard troops to perform what they say are civilian law enforcement duties. One characterized the plan as the Trump administration 'finding a way to get the National Guard into the streets and into American homes,' saying, 'I fear it's going to look like a police state.' A second source said, 'Trump has said he wants to use the National Guard for law enforcement, and the Pentagon and other entities have always said, 'Oh, don't worry, it will never come to that.' But this is it.' Defense officials say the request has not been approved and is being evaluated by Pentagon policy officials, the General Counsel's office, and other Pentagon leadership. The officials say the most likely course of action would be for some parts of the request to be approved and others rejected. But one source briefed on the plans said that Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth is close to approving some elements of the request and considering which state governors to approach first regarding National Guard units. 'We are so much closer to this being real,' said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. DHS is requesting the National Guard troops under Title 32 status, which means they would remain on state active duty under the command of their governor but would be federally funded. Title 32 status generally allows National Guard troops to conduct law enforcement activities without violating the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law that bars the use of federal troops in law enforcement operations. A National Guard member who opposes troops performing such tasks told NBC News, 'I plan to leave the National Guard soon over this.' The Pentagon is also being asked by DHS to pay the full cost of deploying the 21,000 National Guard troops. That comes amid growing tension between the Pentagon and DHS over the cost of border and other immigrant-related operations. The DHS request for National Guard troops arrives when the Pentagon is already footing a $23-million-a-month bill to hold as many as 2,500 undocumented immigrants in a military facility in Texas. Defense officials say they are frustrated that the camp is holding far fewer individuals than they were told to expect and they would like a reprieve. The Defense Department is in a contract with the DHS to help support DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, officers who are under pressure from Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to arrest 3,000 undocumented immigrants a day. But it has been slow going for ICE agents, resulting in fewer arrests of undocumented immigrants across the country. That has resulted in many empty beds at facilities like the one in El Paso, owned and operated by the Defense Department. Military officials say the facility has been holding an average of 150 undocumented immigrants each day over the last several weeks — a fraction of its 2,500 beds. On one recent day, they said, the facility housed fewer than 80 people. Pentagon officials are asking to cut the number of beds in the facility from 2,500 to about 1,000, which they say would save $12 million per month. It is not clear if the DHS request for National Guard troops will increase the need for beds in the El Paso facility. The DHS request also comes as the Pentagon is struggling to fund critical projects to support U.S. troops. 'Congress is aware that the department is redirecting funds from existing military construction projects like barracks improvements for lower enlisted personnel and longstanding infrastructure projects elsewhere in the world in favor of southwest border missions,' a Senate aide who spoke on condition of anonymity told NBC News. 'They are pretty frustrated with the way that the department is ordering them to support DHS out of their own pockets for a grossly disproportionate cost compared to what ICE facilities would cost the government,' added the aide, referring to military officials. Last month, the Pentagon notified Congress that it planned to transfer more than $1.74 million in the current DOD budget to the southwest border mission, as step that will take money away from renovating barracks and base facilities. Service member advocacy groups have criticized the move. Rob Evans, the founder of Hots&Cots, where services members can post reviews of barracks, dining areas and other facilities, says he sees evidence daily of barracks with sewage leaks, mold, failing HVAC systems, and more. 'When funding is pulled from this line, troops pay the price in real ways: delayed repairs, worsening conditions, and a growing sense that their well-being comes second to optics and operations,' Evans said. 'Service members deserve clean, safe, and dignified living conditions. They've earned at least that much.' This article was originally published on


Business Insider
39 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump Ready to Ditch His Tesla Car amid Musk Fallout: 'I Might Just Get Rid of It'
WASHINGTON — June 7, 2025 President Donald Trump is distancing himself from Elon Musk—publicly and materially. According to The Washington Post, Trump has told aides in recent days that he is considering selling or giving away the red Tesla (TSLA) Model S he purchased in March, a gesture that once symbolized his support for Musk. Confident Investing Starts Here: 'I might just get rid of it,' Trump told aides, according to a senior White House official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The car, still parked near the White House as of this week, has become a visible casualty of the rapidly souring relationship between Trump and Musk. The split followed Musk's harsh criticism of the administration's latest domestic policy bill, which he publicly called a 'disgusting abomination.' That comment triggered a sharp response from the president, both publicly and privately. On Air Force One, when asked by a reporter about Musk's alleged drug use, Trump replied: 'I don't want to comment on his drug use. I don't know what his status is.' 'I read an article in The New York Times. I thought it was, frankly, it sounded very unfair to me.' But privately, Trump has reportedly told associates that Musk is 'crazy' and blamed his behavior on drug use, according to The New York Times. Musk Gave No Public Comment on the Car—But a Hint at Peace? As of Saturday afternoon, Elon Musk has not issued any public statement specifically addressing Trump's decision to unload the Tesla. However, he did respond to a suggestion from investor Bill Ackman on X that the two men should reconcile for the good of the country. 'You're not wrong,' Musk replied—his only recent public comment that could be interpreted as a gesture toward de-escalation. Beyond that, Musk has been active on X in recent days, directing criticisms at others, including Steve Bannon and critics of Tesla, but has avoided commenting directly on Trump's actions regarding the car or federal contracts. Trump Weighs Tesla Breakup The sale—or symbolic disposal—of the Tesla would mark a final, visual severing of a political and personal alliance that once had significant policy weight. Musk had been one of Trump's most prominent business backers, and the March purchase of the Model S was, at the time, framed by aides as a nod of approval to the entrepreneur's role in the administration. Now, according to officials, the car is being referred to inside the West Wing as a political relic. And while no final decision has been made, staff say it's become a quiet but pointed symbol of Trump's intent to distance himself from Musk for good. Trump himself, speaking about Musk during a press gaggle on June 6, said: 'I'm very disappointed in Elon. I've helped Elon a lot.' Whether the car is sold, donated, or simply removed from view, it now stands as a monument to one of the most dramatic falling-outs in recent political history. Is Tesla Stock Still a Buy? Meanwhile, Wall Street isn't exactly bullish on Musk's flagship automaker. According to TipRanks, Tesla currently holds a 'Hold' rating based on 37 analyst reviews over the past three months. It's a split camp: 16 analysts rate it a Buy, 10 say Hold, and 11 recommend Sell — a clear reflection of the uncertainty swirling around the company. The market seems just as cautious. The average 12-month price target for TSLA is $284.37, suggesting a 3.7% downside from its current level.