Parent groups sue Colorado officials over transgender rights expansion of anti-discrimination law
A coalition of groups that reject transgender rights sued Colorado officials Monday over a newly signed law that put protections for transgender people, and how they are addressed, into Colorado's anti-discrimination law.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of Colorado, alleges that House Bill 25-1312 violates the First and 14th Amendments .
'The purpose of H.B. 25-1312 is clear. The law punishes those who refuse to speak using chosen names and pronouns, and it does so in order to suppress traditional beliefs about sex and gender. In other words, the law openly discriminates based on viewpoint,' lawyers for the plaintiffs wrote.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The lawsuit was brought by the Virginia-based conservative group Defending Education, the Colorado Parent Advocacy Network, Protect Kids Colorado, a health group called Do No Harm, and Grand Junction dermatologist Dr. Travis Morrell. CPAN and PKC are both parental-rights groups that advocate against 'gender ideology' topics in schools, often from a far-right perspective.
It names Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat, and the members of Colorado's Civil Rights Division as defendants.
HB-1312, also known as the Kelly Loving Act after a transgender woman who died in the 2022 Club Q shooting, expands Colorado's anti-discrimination laws to include a person's chosen name and pronouns. Those laws apply to workplaces, schools and other places of public accommodation.
The law also includes provisions to make it easier for transgender people to change their name and gender markers on birth certificates, drivers licenses and marriage documents.
It was sponsored by Rep. Lorena Garcia of Adams County, Rep. Rebekah Stewart of Lakewood, Sen. Faith Winter of Broomfield and Sen. Chris Kolker of Centennial. It passed with entirely Democratic support, and Gov. Jared Polis signed it on May 16.
The bill was amended to remove several controversial provisions during the legislative process and faced stiff opposition from Republicans and conservative groups, including the parties in the new lawsuit.
They allege in the filing that the law could impact their ability to hold public advocacy events, publish materials and do other work. CPAN and PKC use 'biologically accurate pronouns and birth names' for transgender people, a practice also known as misgendering and deadnaming. The groups worry that continuing to use those names and pronouns will result in an investigation from the state's civil rights commission and individual lawsuits.
They argue that recent legal decisions — including 303 Creative v. Elenis, where a Colorado website designer did not want to create a hypothetical website for a gay couple — support the claim that HB-1312 unconstitutionally compels speech, in this case forcing them to refer to a transgender person by their name.
The lawsuit repeatedly misgenders and deadnames state Rep. Brianna Titone, former state legislative candidate Vivian Smotherman and transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney.
'When CPAN and (Executive Director) Ms. Gimelshteyn use birth names and biologically accurate pronouns, they are not doing so to be malicious or hurtful. They do so because this expression reflects their deeply held beliefs that sex is fixed in each person from the moment of conception and cannot be changed,' the lawsuit says. If they cannot use that language, their impact will be 'greatly diminished.'
Morrell, the dermatologist, contended in the lawsuit that using someone's 'biological pronouns' is necessary for clear communication, as a person's sex assigned at birth could be important when determining proper treatment.
Representatives from the Colorado Civil Rights Division and the attorney general's office were unable to comment on the litigation.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
From TikTok to frontrunner, inside Paz's presidential campaign in Bolivia
Senator Rodrigo Paz, the surprise top finisher in Bolivia's first-round presidential election, spent years traveling the country, posting hundreds of social media videos and honing his image like a full-time influencer. The 57-year-old center-right economist secured 32.1 percent of the votes in Sunday's election, followed by right-wing former president Jorge "Tuto" Quiroga, who took 26.8 percent, according to official preliminary results. It's unclear if lingering name recognition may have helped Paz, the son of former president Jaime Paz Zamora, who led Bolivia from 1989 to 1993 and ran for re-election twice, finishing fourth both times. But just one week before the election, the polls were still placing Paz between third and fifth place in the six-way race. "He has charisma like his father," said Sara Medina, a 51-year-old lawyer in a plaza in Tarija. "He knew how to reach the people." Paz and Quiroga will compete in a runoff on October 19 to decide who will end 20 years of left-wing government in the Latin American country. Though his rivals dominated television screens and filled streets with ads, charismatic Paz connected to the electorate through a combination of social media savvy and the traditional tool of politicians everywhere: pressing the flesh and face-to-face interactions. - Without money - Paz didn't rely on jingles, political fliers or renting venues for rallies. "This is a case where authenticity and digital storytelling have overcome the traditional machinery of mass media and money," said Erick Hurtado, a Bolivian political marketing expert. And while his team applied their own guerrilla marketing strategy, Paz is hardly an outsider. His experience in politics runs two decades deep, having served as mayor, councilor, deputy and senator under the Christian Democratic Party banner. His popularity has only grown since adding Edman Lara -- nicknamed "Captain Lara" -- to the ticket as vice president, thanks to his spontaneity and popularity on social media. "They connected directly with... a younger, more popular electorate," Hurtado said. Since 2023, Lara has become an anti-corruption champion, using videos and livestreams to reveal police abuse on Instagram and TikTok, garnering tens of thousands of likes and comments. "While Lara worked social media, Rodrigo traveled to many places across the country" on bare bones road trips, reaching far-flung destinations after long hours of travel, Hurtado said. Paz says he has visited 220 of Bolivia's 340 municipalities since he began his tours four years ago. In July, when Paz was excluded from a business forum in Bolivia's economic hub, Santa Cruz, his campaign crashed the event. They hoisted a massive banner with a phone number on it, cajoling organizers "to invite the candidate" to participate in forums and debates, gaining traction online. Monday, the day after the first round elections, Lara stole the show during a rally attended by thousands of supporters in El Alto. "I am the guarantee. If Rodrigo Paz does not deliver, I will confront him," he said, issuing a warning to his own running mate. - Center stage - While Paz won with an overwhelming 46.9 percent of the vote in the capital city, he only took third place in his home region of Tarija -- reflecting voter dissatisfaction with his performance there as mayor. "His name carries historical weight, but he hasn't won the support of his own turf," Hurtado said. "There was a sort of punitive vote." The next round of voting will be different for Paz and Lara, who will now be at the center of national debate, and the target for attacks. "They are no longer the unexpected contenders," Hurtado said. "They need to deepen their narrative, expand their proposals, and shield themselves from social and digital warfare," while maintaining a personal touch with voters. With two months left before the runoff, Hurtado warns, "Captain Lara's anti-corruption discourse has been powerful, but it's not enough to govern." gta/vel/db/nn/sla/dw/abs
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Oklahoma Plans to Test Out of State Teachers for Wokeness
Oklahoma's education department has approved plans to force teachers from California or New York to pass an ideology test to ensure that they aren't too 'woke' before they hire them. The test was created by right-wing think-tank Prager University, which has made headlines recently for developing education material that minimizes American slavery. It features fifty questions about the government, gender, and religion. The education department posted five sample questions from the exam, including, 'What are the first three words of the Constitution?' and a question about the biological differences between men and women. Teaching applicants from California and New York were notified that they will not be accepted without completing the test. 'We're not bringing in woke indoctrinators into the classroom,' said Oklahoma's Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters. 'It's a very America-first approach.' Walters hopes to release the exam 'soon.' He has also blocked board of education members from viewing the exam before potential teachers receive it. Oklahoma Education Association President Cari Elledge told USA Today that she believes the move will only exacerbate Oklahoma's public school teacher shortage. The state teachers union wrote in a letter that Walters 'has no legal authority to vet certified teachers based on political ideology.' Walters has made previous headlines for trying to force Trump bibles and prayer into classrooms, reportedly watching pornography during a school board meeting, and inviting ICE to perform raids on the children of his state while they were at school. In short, he appears to be a loyal MAGA soldier who happens to have an alarming amount of power over the teachers and students of Oklahoma, and this test only reaffirms that. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Federal judge blocks parts of Mississippi ban on DEI in public schools
JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — A federal judge has blocked portions of Mississippi's ban on diversity, equity and inclusion practices in public schools from being enforced while a lawsuit against it is underway. The provisions blocked by U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate on Monday seek to prohibit public schools from discussing a list of 'divisive concepts' related to race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation and national origin. They would also prevent public schools from maintaining programs, courses or offices that promote DEI or endorse 'divisive concepts,' and ban diversity training requirements. The preliminary injunction does not block other portions of the law, including those that prevent schools from giving preferential treatment based on race, sex, color or national origin and that penalize students or staff for their refusal to embrace DEI concepts. The law, which took effect in April, aims to prevent public schools from 'engaging in discriminatory practices' by banning DEI offices, trainings and programs. Any school in violation of the act could lose state funding. A group of teachers, parents and students is suing the state, arguing that the law violates their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Wingate wrote in his ruling that he finds the law to be at odds with the First Amendment and the public interest of the state. 'It is unconstitutionally vague, fails to treat speech in a viewpoint-neutral manner, and carries with it serious risks of terrible consequences with respect to the chilling of expression and academic freedom,' he wrote. Wingate also granted the plaintiff's request to add class action claims to the lawsuit, meaning the injunction will apply to teachers, professors and students across the state. The plaintiff's lawyers sought the addition after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June limited the ability of federal judges to grant sweeping injunctions. Jarvis Dortch, the executive director of the ACLU of Mississippi, which is helping litigate the case, said he was thankful for Wingate's stance. 'The Court sees the law for what it plainly is — an attempt to stop the proper exchange of ideas within the classroom," Dortch said in a statement. Wingate's ruling follows a temporary restraining order he granted to the plaintiffs in July. At an Aug. 5 hearing, lawyers representing the plaintiffs argued the law is too confusing, leaving parents, teachers and students wondering what they can and cannot say and whether they could face consequences as a result of their speech. Cliff Johnson, a professor at the University of Mississippi Law School and Mississippi director of the MacArthur Justice Center, testified that he and his students often discuss what could be considered 'divisive topics.' Johnson said he did not believe the law would allow him to teach about the First, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments; the court case that paved the way for the internment of Japanese citizens during WWII; portions of the Civil Rights Act; or the murders of Emmett Till and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. 'I think I'm in a very difficult position. I can teach my class as usual and run the serious risk of being disciplined, or I could abandon something that's very important to me,' Johnson testified. 'I feel a bit paralyzed.' The Mississippi Attorney General's Office argued that public employees do not have First Amendment rights. 'They are speaking for the government and the government has every right to tell them what they need to say on its behalf,' said Lisa Reppeto, an attorney at the state attorney general's office. She added that the First Amendment does not give students the right to dictate what their school does or does not say. Reppeto also said the consequences of the law are aimed at the schools — not students or teachers — and that the plaintiffs' 'argument is not consistent with what is in the statute.' Solve the daily Crossword
