Latest news with #ACLUof
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Transgender teens challenge Kansas law banning gender-affirming care for minors
Two transgender teenagers and their parents are challenging a Kansas law banning gender-affirming care for minors, arguing the measure violates the state constitution and 'is actively harming Kansas families' in a lawsuit filed Wednesday in a state district court. Kansas's Senate Bill 63 prohibits health care providers from administering treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgeries to minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria, characterized by a severe psychological distress that stems from a mismatch between a person's gender identity and sex at birth. The bill, passed by the state Legislature in January, includes exceptions for minors born with 'a medically verifiable disorder of sex development.' Health care providers who break the law, which also targets social transition, face civil penalties and may be stripped of their license. The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Kansas filed Wednesday's challenge in Douglas County District Court pseudonymously on behalf of plaintiffs Lily Loe, 13, Ryan Roe, 16, and their mothers, Lisa Loe and Rebecca Roe. The two children 'have been thriving since they started receiving puberty blockers and hormone therapy,' the lawsuit states, 'but now their trusted doctors in Kansas can no longer help them, and they are at risk of unimaginable suffering.' For their parents, Senate Bill 63 'impermissibly infringes on the fundamental right to the care, custody, and control of their children,' the lawsuit says, 'by displacing their medical decision-making authority with a government mandate, even when they, their adolescent children, and medical providers are all aligned.' Republican state Attorney General Kris Kobach, who is named in the lawsuit, did not immediately return a request for comment. Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill in February for the third time in as many years, though her veto ultimately did not stand. 'It is disappointing that the Legislature continues to push for government interference in Kansans' private medical decisions instead of focusing on issues that improve all Kansans' lives,' Kelly said in a statement at the time. 'Infringing on parental rights is not appropriate, nor is it a Kansas value. As I've said before, it is not the job of politicians to stand between a parent and a child who needs medical care of any kind.' The state's Republican-led Legislature overrode Kelly's veto the following week. Kansas Senate President Ty Masterson (R) and House Speaker Dan Hawkins (R) said they voted to override the governor's action 'in honor of the children Governor Kelly failed to protect with her repeated vetoes of this sensible legislation.' The ACLU and the ACLU of Kansas are seeking an injunction to block enforcement of the law while the case moves forward. 'Our clients and every Kansan should have the freedom to make their own private medical decisions and consult with their doctors without the intrusion of Kansas politicians,' said D.C. Hiegert, civil liberties legal fellow for the ACLU of Kansas. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
3 days ago
- Health
- The Hill
Transgender teens challenge Kansas law banning gender-affirming care for minors
Two transgender teenagers and their parents are challenging a Kansas law banning gender-affirming care for minors, arguing the measure violates the state constitution and 'is actively harming Kansas families' in a lawsuit filed Wednesday in a state district court. Kansas's Senate Bill 63 prohibits health care providers from administering treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgeries to minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria, characterized by a severe psychological distress that stems from a mismatch between a person's gender identity and sex at birth. The bill, passed by the state Legislature in January, includes exceptions for minors born with 'a medically verifiable disorder of sex development.' Health care providers who break the law, which also targets social transition, face civil penalties and may be stripped of their license. The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Kansas filed Wednesday's challenge in Douglas County District Court pseudonymously on behalf of plaintiffs Lily Loe, 13, Ryan Roe, 16, and their mothers, Lisa Loe and Rebecca Roe. The two children 'have been thriving since they started receiving puberty blockers and hormone therapy,' the lawsuit states, 'but now their trusted doctors in Kansas can no longer help them, and they are at risk of unimaginable suffering.' For their parents, Senate Bill 63 'impermissibly infringes on the fundamental right to the care, custody, and control of their children,' the lawsuit says, 'by displacing their medical decision-making authority with a government mandate, even when they, their adolescent children, and medical providers are all aligned.' Republican state Attorney General Kris Kobach, who is named in the lawsuit, did not immediately return a request for comment. Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill in February for the third time in as many years, though her veto ultimately did not stand. 'It is disappointing that the Legislature continues to push for government interference in Kansans' private medical decisions instead of focusing on issues that improve all Kansans' lives,' Kelly said in a statement at the time. 'Infringing on parental rights is not appropriate, nor is it a Kansas value. As I've said before, it is not the job of politicians to stand between a parent and a child who needs medical care of any kind.' The state's Republican-led Legislature overrode Kelly's veto the following week. Kansas Senate President Ty Masterson (R) and House Speaker Dan Hawkins (R) said they voted to override the governor's action 'in honor of the children Governor Kelly failed to protect with her repeated vetoes of this sensible legislation.' The ACLU and the ACLU of Kansas are seeking an injunction to block enforcement of the law while the case moves forward. 'Our clients and every Kansan should have the freedom to make their own private medical decisions and consult with their doctors without the intrusion of Kansas politicians,' said D.C. Hiegert, civil liberties legal fellow for the ACLU of Kansas.
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal judge blocks Idaho immigration law with preliminary injunction
A federal judge in Idaho has temporarily blocked a state immigration bill aimed at allowing local police to arrest migrants suspected of crossing into the state illegally if they are involved in another crime. Federal judge Amanda Brailsford, a President Biden appointee, issued a preliminary injunction against parts of Idaho's House Bill 83, which criminalizes state entry and reentry and was passed by the legislature in March. It also aims to assist the federal deportation process. The bill, also known as the Immigration Cooperation and Enforcement Act, mirrors a similar 2023 Texas law which faced pushback by the Biden administration. Why Are Americans Fleeing The West Coast For This Deep Red State? Freedom And Friendliness Gov. Brad Little signed the bill into law on March 27 and it became effective immediately, but Brailsford blocked Idaho from enforcing it through a temporary restraining order that she later extended in response to a lawsuit by the ACLU of Idaho, according to the Idaho Capital Sun. The ACLU argues that the law attempts to supersede federal immigration enforcement by allowing local law enforcement to act as immigration agents. On Tuesday, Brailsford issued a longer-lasting preliminary injunction, effectively halting its enforcement. Read On The Fox News App In her ruling, the judge stated that the ACLU of Idaho had demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on several key claims, including that the new offenses established by the law may violate the U.S. Constitution's due process clause. She also wrote that the law is likely preempted by federal immigration law and that the organizations and five unnamed individuals represented in the lawsuit could face irreparable harm if the law were enforced, per the Idaho Capital Sun. Idaho Judge Issues Order On Kohberger's Bid To Have His Family Guaranteed Courtroom Seating Under the law, entering the state unlawfully is classified as a misdemeanor. However, if the person is involved in another crime—such as theft—or is under investigation, the offense could be elevated to a felony and may trigger deportation by federal authorities, according to Idaho News. The preliminary injunction was welcomed by the ACLU of Idaho. "We are pleased the court recognized that enforcement of this law is harmful and unconstitutional," ACLU of Idaho Staff Attorney Emily Croston said in a statement, per the Idaho Capital Sun. "We are confident this lawsuit will succeed on its merits, and we hope it sends a message to Idaho's lawmakers that passing anti-immigrant, unconstitutional legislation is not what Idaho needs." The outlet reports that the state's attorney general's office said it is reviewing the decision to determine next article source: Federal judge blocks Idaho immigration law with preliminary injunction
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
REAL ID requirements among policies difficult for transgender, nonbinary Arkansans to navigate
(Courtesy of the Department of Finance and Administration) Gender-nonconforming Arkansans might not meet the state's requirements to obtain a REAL ID in order to board flights or enter certain federal buildings, which is a week away from being required by federal law. Applicants for REAL IDs need to provide the Department of Finance and Administration with four different forms of identification: A current driver's license, state-issued ID, or school or work ID as proof of identity A passport or birth certificate as proof of legal presence in the United States A government-issued social security card Two documents providing proof of address, such as utility bills or bank statements, issued within the last six months The documents 'all have to sync up,' Finance Secretary Jim Hudson said last week. Transgender and nonbinary Arkansans might have changed their names or gender information on some but not all legal documents, and state policies have made it difficult for these groups of people to obtain documents that accurately reflect who they are, advocates say. Birth certificates can be legally altered, and until this year, the federal government allowed gender-neutral information on U.S. passports. 'The government has played politics with people's lives and upended people's ability to accurately and properly identify themselves,' said Holly Dickson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas. 'This has created much chaos and turmoil for no good reason while making life harder and more unsafe for all of us.' Last year, the ACLU of Arkansas led a lawsuit against the DFA's decision to stop issuing gender-neutral driver's licenses. The case was dropped after Arkansas officials permanently adopted the new policy, which prohibits the use of an 'X' to indicate someone's gender in place of 'M' or 'F.' Arkansans urge state finance department not to reverse gender-neutral driver's license policy Several transgender and nonbinary Arkansans, including Maggs Gallup of Little Rock, urged the finance department to maintain the previous policy, which had been in place for 14 years. Gallup said in an interview Monday that they are putting off obtaining a REAL ID in case doing so requires the state to remove the X gender marker from their driver's license. Hudson told lawmakers that a driver's license is 'not a platform for speech' and 'not a platform for personal identity.' Gallup disagreed, saying their gender-neutral ID is important to them and putting incorrect information on an ID is 'a deeply incongruent thing to do.' 'In an ideal world, it would be great to have the state and officials recognize our gender,' Gallup said. 'They don't get to determine who we are, no matter what letters we put on our IDs.' REAL IDs began with a law passed by Congress in 2005 as a response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Instituting REAL IDs statewide 'will help fight terrorism and reduce identity fraud,' according to the finance department website. The federal Transportation Security Administration accepts passports in place of REAL IDs as identification to board a flight. Miss Major Griffin-Gracy, a well-known transgender advocate who lives in Little Rock, said last week on Facebook that she was initially denied access to a flight because she has an X on her driver's license, but she was allowed to board after displaying her passport containing a male gender marker. Griffin-Gracy is 78 years old and gender-nonconforming, and she was present at the 1969 Stonewall riot between LGBTQ+ people and police in New York City. In her Facebook video, she expressed disbelief that her passport was accepted even though she did not appear masculine. She also said 'we the people' should 'stand up and fight' President Donald Trump's administration, which does not recognize gender-neutral IDs. Gallup said they are also concerned about potential limits on travel, both domestic and international, with or without a REAL ID. Their teenage child is old enough to learn to drive but is putting off obtaining a learner's permit because of potential bureaucratic obstacles due to their gender-nonconforming identity, Gallup said. Bill regulating transgender Arkansans' bathroom use heads to House despite public pushback 'This is just one part of a larger, really complicated network of new rules and legislation that are challenging to navigate' for transgender and nonbinary Arkansans, Gallup said. State lawmakers and Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders approved a law this month that will allow Arkansans to sue for damages if they encounter someone in a bathroom, changing room, shelter or correctional facility who does not align with the 'designated sex' of the space. The state has also enacted laws in the past few years that ban transgender girls from playing girls' sports, require public school students to use bathrooms that match their gender assigned at birth, regulate pronoun use in schools and allow doctors who provide transgender minors' health care to be sued for medical malpractice. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Axios
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Axios
Four takeaways from Utah international student visa lawsuit
The ACLU of Utah filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security on Friday, accusing the agency of violating the rights of international students when it revoked their visas without explanation this month. Why it matters: The sudden visa revocations could not only force students out of school and work but also expose them to arrest, detention and deportation, the lawsuit alleges. State of play: The ACLU filed the complaint on behalf of eight anonymous international students — from China, Japan, Mexico and Nigeria — attending Utah schools, including BYU-Idaho. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting director Todd Lyons were named as defendants. The big picture: More than 1,000 foreign students across the U.S. have had their visas or statuses voided by the Trump administration, CNN reports, and many are challenging the revocations in court. The Trump administration has claimed that some students lost their status because they were linked to pro-Palestinian protests. Others have had their visas taken away for past crimes, traffic violations, and unknown reasons. Zoom in: As of April 11, 22 students at the University of Utah have had their visas canceled, according to university officials. Over 50 students have been impacted statewide. Yes, but:"A few university students' changes in status have not been connected to a clear, specific interaction with law enforcement, and they face an uncertain path to restoring their right to study in the U.S.," University of Utah president Taylor Randall said a statement this month. What they're saying: "It is a privilege to be granted a visa to live and study in the United States of America," DHS assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. "When you break our laws and advocate for violence and terrorism, that privilege should be revoked." The latest: During his monthly news conference last Thursday, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox told reporters he had reached out to the Trump administration to gather more information about the revoked visas. "We've asked them to give us a little bit of a heads-up when these things are happening," Cox said, adding that some students were found to have criminal backgrounds, while others were not. Here are four takeaways from the Utah lawsuit: 1. DHS revoked the F-1 visas of international students for "unknown and unspecified reasons," per the lawsuit. Attorneys argue the students had no criminal history that gave the defendants a legal basis for terminating their visas. 2. Students were not given the chance to contest the terminations, according to the complaint. Attorneys argue DHS violated the students' due process rights under the Fifth Amendment. 3. Attorneys are seeking a temporary restraining order to reinstate the students' records from the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVIS), a database that tracks their compliance to maintain their visa status. The lawsuit alleges Immigrations and Customs Enforcement illegally deleted the students' records from the registry. 4. Students can apply for reinstatement through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, but the lawsuit alleges the defendants have informed multiple schools that they will deny those applications.
