A Maryland man has been charged with threatening the Human Rights Campaign, referencing the Nashville school shooting, in which the shooter was said to be transgender.
The Department of Justice filed a criminal complaint Monday against Adam Michael Nettina, 34, of West Friendship, Md. He is accused of making the threat by phone to HRC’s Washington, D.C., headquarters the night of March 28. A transcription of his voice mail, contained in the complaint, reads as follows:
“You guys going to shoot up our schools now? Is that how it’s going to be? You just gonna to kill little kids. You’re just going to slaughter fucking little kids. Let me tell you something, we’re waiting, we’re waiting. And if you want a war, we’ll have a war. And we’ll fucking slaughter you back. We’ll cut your throats. We’ll put a bullet in your head. We’re not going to give a fuck. You started this bullshit. You’re going to kill us? We’re going to kill you ten times more in full.”
The March 27 shooting at Covenant Presbyterian School took the lives of three children and three adults. The shooter, who was killed by police, was said to have been a trans man. Right-wing politicians have been using the shooter’s supposed identity to stir up hatred of trans people, although mass shooters are overwhelmingly cisgender men, a majority of them white.
Nettina is charged with making “interstate communications with a threat to injure,” according to a DOJ press release. If convicted, he could be sentenced to up to five years in prison.
The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court in Maryland. The FBI’s Baltimore Field Office investigated the case, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul E. Budlow for the District of Maryland and Deputy Chief Bobbi Bernstein of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section are prosecuting it.
HRC spokesperson Elizabeth Bibi put the threat in context of other attacks on LGBTQ+ Americans. “The LGBTQ+ community is under attack in statehouses across the country and on social media platforms,” she told The Advocate via email. “This violent, hateful rhetoric leads to stigma, and stigma leads to physical violence. As we see radical politicians sow hate and fear with anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric, we have seen the physical threats to our community multiply — from armed men at Pride parades, to threats of violence against local drag shows at libraries, to bomb threats at children’s hospitals, to the continued rise in fatal violence against members of our community, especially Black transgender women.
“Late last month, HRC received two threatening voicemails. These threats were referred to law enforcement, who have since confirmed that they have made an arrest. We are grateful to law enforcement for acting so quickly to keep our community safe, and we condemn any and all violent words or deeds. We will continue our work to call out those who spread violence, fear, and disinformation.”
The Education Department proposed a rule Thursday in connection with the growing number of states that have banned transgender student-athletes from participating on school sports teams that align with their gender identities.
The department’s proposed rule would change Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 — which prohibits discrimination based on sex in federally funded education programs — by, in part, prohibiting blanket exclusions of trans girls and women from female sports teams, which have become law in 20 states.
The measure would, however, permit some restrictions in certain sports at more elite levels of competition, such as in high school or college.
The proposed regulation, which will be open for public comment for 30 days, says programs or schools that adopt sex-related criteria “that would limit or deny a student’s eligibility to participate on a male or female team consistent with their gender identity” must meet two standards.
First, the restriction must “be substantially related to the achievement of an important educational objective,” and, second, it must “minimize harms to students whose opportunity to participate on a male or female team consistent with their gender identity would be limited or denied,” according to the draft of the proposed rule.
“A one-size-fits-all categorical ban that excludes all transgender girls and women from participation on any female athletic team, for example, would not satisfy the proposed regulation because it would fail to account for the nature of particular sports, levels of competition, or the greater education level of students to which it would apply,” a senior Education Department official said at a news conference Thursday.
The official said the department expects that elementary school students would be able to participate on school sports teams consistent with their gender identities under the proposed rule, while schools might choose to restrict the participation of some trans students in higher grade levels in certain cases.
“The proposed regulation would give schools flexibility to identify their own important educational objectives,” the official said. “They might include, for example, fairness in competition or preventing sports-related injuries. Some objectives, like the disapproval of transgender students or a desire to harm a particular student, would not qualify as important educational objectives.”
The department said in a statement that its approach fits with Congress’ direction in 1974 that the Title IX regulations include reasonable provisions that consider “the nature of particular sports.”
The statementalso noted that many sports governing bodies have developed participation criteria and that the NCAA adopted a sport-by-sport policy for transgender athletes’ participation last year. The official who spoke to media Thursday, however, said that the department does not take a stance on the NCAA policy and that it would not advise a school to adopt a particular athletic association’s policy.
“A key element of the proposed rule is a need for schoolsto have particularized consideration for each sport and level of competition and grade or education level, and I would caution any school about taking something off the shelf without offering that particularized consideration,” the official said.
The NCAA changed its policy amid a media firestorm ignited after Lia Thomas, a trans swimmer at the University of Pennsylvania, broke multiple records at a meet in December 2021.
Efforts to restrict trans athletes’ participation are part of a nationwide wave of bills targeting LGBTQ rights. State legislators have introduced more than 450 bills targeting the LGBTQ community this year, according to the American Civil Liberties Union and a separate group of researchers who are tracking the flow of legislation.
In addition to the 20 states that have passed trans athlete laws, 14 have passed restrictions on transition-related health care for minors.
Asked by a reporter Thursday how the Education Department would enforce the proposed rule against states that have already passed categorical bans, the senior department official said, “Federal civil rights law is the law of the land.”
The department would investigate, the official said, and in the past, when it has identified legal violations, school committees have elected to come into compliance.
“In the unlikely scenario that a school committee declined to come into compliance with the law, the tool that the department has is to initiate fund withholding and to ensure that no federal dollars are spent to discriminate against students,” the official said.
The department plans to have the rule finalized in May.
Reactions from LGBTQ advocacy groups and trans advocates are mixed.
Sasha Buchert, a senior attorney for Lambda Legal and the director of its Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project, said the proposal “includes critical recognition of the importance of participating in sports for transgender youth and shows why 100% of the state bans are invalid.”
“We are concerned about whether the proposed rule can properly eliminate the discrimination that transgender students experience due to the pervasive bias and ignorance about who they are,” Buchert said in a statement. “Given the importance of the opportunity to participate in athletics to students’ educational experience, we look forward to submitting comments and working with the administration to further remove those remaining bigotry-based barriers to full and equal participation by transgender youth.”
Alejandra Caraballo, a trans advocate and clinical instructor at Harvard Law’s Cyberlaw Clinic, called the proposal a “backwards betrayal” that would force trans people “to have to spend our time dealing with god damn sports instead of criminal bans on our healthcare.”
President Joe Biden “could have just done nothing,” she said on Twitter. “This is legitimizing transphobia.”
At a time of record anti-LGBTQ+ legislation at the state level and attacks from other government officials, there’s also some good news: LGBTQ+ people are serving in elected office in record numbers, and they’re helping to counter the hate.
The number of out LGBTQ+ elected officials in the U.S. increased by 68 percent over the past five years, rising from 698 to 1,174, according to a new report from the LGBTQ Victory Institute, the educational and training arm of the LGBTQ Victory Fund. This was helped along by rainbow waves in recent elections.
“In 2018, LGBTQ+ people hit the campaign trail in record-breaking numbers — and with their victories, ensured 2019 saw the highest levels of LGBTQ+ representation in U.S. government at that time,” says the report, “Leading Out Loud.” “The numbers have only risen since this inaugural Rainbow Wave. More out candidates have hit the campaign trail since. And they’ve kept winning, shattering rainbow ceilings across the country.” At least 436 out candidates,almost all Democrats, won their races in the 2022 midterm election.
“Not only are more LGBTQ+ people serving in office than ever before, they are more unified, determined and diverse than ever,” the report notes. They are indeed diverse in many ways.
LGBTQ+ elected officials are more racially diverse than ever. The proportion of LGBTQ+ people of color serving in the U.S. increased from 22 percent in 2019 to 32 percent in 2023, according to Victory Institute. Examples, pictured above, include 2022 winners U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (far left), who was born in Peru and is the first out gay immigrant in Congress; Connecticut Treasurer Erick Russell (second from left), a gay man who is the first Black LGBTQ+ person to be elected to a statewide office in the U.S.; and Minnesota State Rep. Alicia Kozlowski (third from left), a Two-Spirit person who is of Indigenous and Latinx heritage.
Women from the LGBTQ+ community have made great progress as well. They saw a saw a 60 percent increase in representation, rising in number from 287 to 459 over the period covered by the report. Among those elected in 2022 are U.S. Rep. Becca Balint (pictured, far right), a lesbian who is the first woman to represent Vermont in Congress, and the nation’s first two out lesbian governors, Maura Healey of Massachusetts and Tina Kotek of Oregon.
LGBTQ+ elected officials are more gender-diverse than ever. Representation for nonbinary and gender-nonconforming people increased by 300 percent over the past five years, according to the report. Representation for transgender women increased by 173 percent and for trans men by 80 percent. Examples include Kozlowski, who is nonbinary, and Minnesota House colleague Leigh Finke, a trans woman who was also elected in 2022, making them the first nonbinary and trans people in Minnesota’s legislature. Montana also elected its first trans and nonbinary state representatives in 2022 — Zooey Zephyr and SJ Howell, respectively.
LGBTQ+ elected officials are more diverse in terms of sexual orientation too, with queer, bisexual, and pansexual representation growing more than 200 percent since 2019.
The increase in representation goes across all levels of government. There are 13 out LGBTQ+ members of Congress now, the most ever, and many of them are countering the far right’s attack on the LGBTQ+ community and all things progressive. Garcia, for instance, is making good on his promise to be a thorn in the side of Republican Congresswomen Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert.
State legislatures saw historic increases too. The number of out LGBTQ+ state lawmakers increased by 55 percent, from 147 in 2019 to a record 228 in 2023. They are fighting back against anti-LGBTQ+ moves as well. Minnesota’s Finke, for example, is behind legislation to make the state a sanctuary for trans youth seeking gender-affirming care that they can’t get in their home states. Among states banning such care is neighboring South Dakota, but its first out gay male legislator, Kameron Nelson, spoke out against it, calling it “reprehensible.”
LGBTQ+ representation in local government saw the greatest increase since 2019. It increased by 83 percent, from 394 to 721.
“The momentum of the LGBTQ+ community’s political power has not gone untested,” the report notes “Bigoted legislators, who detest growing LGBTQ+ acceptance and representation, are unleashing an agenda of hate that would push our community backwards. These attacks, however, have lit a fire under the LGBTQ+ community, inspiring more LGBTQ+ people to run.
“These record-breaking numbers signify progress is still very much possible, and LGBTQ+ Victory Institute remains committed to supporting LGBTQ+ leaders called to public service. Because we will not — cannot — stop until we achieve equitable representation. Our rights depend on it.”
A new poll found that a majority of Democratic, independent, and even Republican likely voters believe that there is “too much legislation” aimed at reducing LGBTQ+ rights at the state level.
The progressive polling firm and think tank Data for Progress conducted a survey of 1220 participants and asked about the 429 bills presented at state legislatures attacking LGBTQ+ rights. Most of the bills are aimed at transgender youth, and 17 have already become law this year.
Republican lawmakers have worked round the clock to pass oppressive bills targeting gender-affirming care, bathroom usage, drag shows, and trans students.
72% of Democratic voters agreed with the statement that there is “too much legislation. Politicians are playing political theater and using these bills as a wedge issue,” and only 20% agreed that it’s “the right amount of legislation. Politicians are dealing with a real danger that needs to be addressed.” 65% of independent voters agreed that there is too much anti-LGBTQ+ legislation this year.
The more surprising result – considering how the vast majority of lawmakers voting for these bills are Republicans – was that 55% of Republican voters agreed that there is too much anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. Only 33% said that there is the “right amount” of such bills.
The survey also asked if people believed that being transgender is a “natural phenomenon that has occurred throughout history” that’s “normal” or if they believed that being trans is a “new phenomenon created by our modern woke culture” that will “harm our children.” Most Democrats (78%) and most independents (58%) agreed that being trans is natural. Only 34% of Republicans agreed that being trans is natural, while a majority (55%) said that it’s a new phenomenon.
While Republicans lag on that issue, Data for Progress noted that a majority of all likely voters (57%) said that being trans is natural, which could indicate that attacks on trans youth might not be the potent electoral winner that many Republican strategists believe it is.
While state Republican lawmakers have been introducing anti-transgender legislation for over a decade, there was an explosion of such legislation in 2021, just several weeks after Donald Trump’s loss in the general election. Democrats accused Republicans – many of whom had never shown any concern for the state of girls’ and women’s sports – of using transgender kids to distract from the GOP’s less popular positions on the COVID-19 pandemic and the economy.
Part of the reason that such a strategy could work is that transgender people make up a small percentage of the population and many people don’t think they know anyone who is transgender. Only 36% of Democrats, 39% of independents, and 25% of Republicans said that they know someone who is trans or nonbinary, and a majority of each group said that they didn’t.
And knowing a trans or nonbinary person decreases the chance that someone will see them as a threat. Among likely voters who know someone trans or nonbinary, 78% said that trans people are not a threat to straight families and 66% said that they’re not a threat to children. Among people who don’t know anyone who is trans, though, those numbers dropped to 52% and 41%, respectively.
Most Democratic voters (54%) and independent voters (63%) believe that Democratic elected officials should be doing more to fight anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. The survey didn’t ask what they believe Democrats should be doing.
When it comes to drag bans, a majority of Democrats (68%) and independents (55%) said that they had seen a drag performance either live or on TV. 53% of Republicans, though, said that they have never seen a drag performance at all.
Republican New York Congressman George Santos has introduced a bill that would ban U.S. foreign aid to countries that criminalize LGBTQ people and women.
“Discrimination against both women and the LGBTQ community is unacceptable,” said Santos in a March 24 press release that announced the introduction of Equality and Fiscal Accountability Protection Act of 2023. “My bill will send a clear message that the United States will not offer federal aid to countries found to be violating the rights of individuals based on sexual orientation. We as a nation have a responsibility to stand up for the human rights of all people, regardless of race, religion, or sexual orientation.”
The press release notes the bill would require the State Department “to assess a country’s human rights record before providing federal aid.”
“Countries found to be violating these rights would be ineligible to receive aid until they take steps to address the issues,” reads the press release. “If passed, the bill would make a significant step forward in the fight for LGBTQ and women’s rights and would send a strong message to countries that discrimination or criminalization will not be tolerated.”
Congress’ website currently notes “text has not been received for H.R. (House Resolution) 1736.”
Santos introduced the bill two days after the State Department released its annual human rights report that, among other things, details the prevalence of so-called conversion therapy and the treatment of intersex people around the world. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield on the same day hosted a meeting at the United Nations that focused on the integration of LGBTQ and intersex rights into the U.N. Security Council’s work.
The Biden-Harris administration in 2021 released a memorandum that committed the U.S. to promoting LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad. U.S. Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) and U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) last week introduced a bill that would require the country to promote LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad through its public policy.
The House Ethics Committee last month opened an investigation into Santos, who is openly gay, over allegations of financial and sexual misconduct. The embattled New York Republican has admitted to lying about his professional and educational background.
A school district in Nebraska is facing a lawsuit after a high school shut down its newspaper because students produced an LGBTQ+ edition.
The lawsuit states that Grand Island Northwest Public Schools and its superintendent violated the First Amendment rights of students by axing the Viking Saga in May 2022.
The newspaper had been running for 54 years.
As reported by the Associated Press, legal action has been brought by the Nebraska High School Press Association, and former Grand Island Northwest High School journalist Marcus Pennell.
The student newspaper staff were made aware that the publication was being pulled three days after they published the June edition of the Viking Saga, which was a special LGBTQ+ print for Pride Month.
The June newspaper included an article titled ‘Pride and prejudice: LGBTQIA+’ which examined the history of Pride Month, and included a piece about Florida’s oppressive ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill.
On 22 May 2022, an email from a school employee said the print edition had been axed because “the school board and superintendent are unhappy with the last issue’s editorial content”.
However, in November, the teacher in charge of running the school’s journalism offering confirmed the paper would return in the spring but under the helm of another teacher, and in digital form only.
‘I was crushed’
Despite this move to somewhat revive the publication, legal action is still being pursued over the decision to cancel the Viking Saga in the first place.
When the return of the paper was announced, the Associated Press reported that an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union said “attempts to quash student journalism and student opinions violate students’ rights to freedom of speech and equal protection”.
Marcus Pennell said: “It is hard to find words for what it felt like watching people who were supposed to be supporting our education instead silence us for covering issues impacting our lives.
“I was crushed.”
Pennell, who is trans, alleges in the lawsuit that he and other staff could not use their chosen name or preferred pronouns in their bylines.
Speaking with Local4Pennell said: “I just don’t want other students to have to go through what I did.
“I’m sure after all this happened all the LGBT students at Northwest don’t feel safe writing about their lives or the issues that matter to them, so anything I can do to kinda increase their inclination to share their stories.”
The lawsuit is seeking a declaration that the school district broke the law, alongside unspecified damages.
The U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) is appealing a judge’s decision to nullify a section of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that requires insurance companies to cover the HIV prevention drug regimen PrEP.
Last week, U.S. District Juge Reed O’Connor struck down a section of the ACA requiring coverage of certain preventive health care services, which, in addition to PrEP, includes some cancer screenings, contraception, immunizations, and more. O’Connor’s decision leaves over 150 million people vulnerable to the added costs of this care.
A coordinated effort by right-wing media and lawmakers has decimated community-based programs addressing healthcare for LGBTQ+ people in Tennessee
O’Connor’s decision came about in response to a lawsuit filed by two Christian business owners and six individuals who felt being required to cover PrEP promotes “homosexual behavior” and is a violation of religious freedom. The plaintiffs also argued that being required to cover other preventive services makes them “complicit in facilitating… drug use, and sexual activity outside of marriage between one man and one woman.”
In a statement on the appeal, out White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said President Joe Biden “is glad to see the Department of Justice is appealing the judge’s decision” and that the case “is yet another attack on the Affordable Care Act, which has been the law of the land for 13 years and survived three challenges before the Supreme Court.”
“Preventive care saves lives, saves families money, and protects and improves our health,” she continued. “Because of the ACA, millions of Americans have access to free cancer and heart disease screenings. This decision threatens to jeopardize critical care. The administration will continue to fight to improve health care and make it more affordable for hard-working families, even in the face of attacks from special interests.”
Michael Weinstein, the founder and president of the Aids Healthcare Foundation, said O’Connor’s decision “will have dangerous consequences” for millions of Americans.
“While we expect this unconstitutional ruling ultimately will fail, the decision creates uncertainty and is a threat to public health,” Weinstein said.
This is not the first ruling O’Connor has made against PrEP and the ACA. In September 2022, he ruled that a provision of the act requiring employee health insurance plans to provide full coverage of HIV-prevention drugs (as well as other preventive health care services) is a violation of religious freedom. That ruling only applied to the companies of the plaintiffs in the case.
Long known as an anti-LGBTQ+ extremist, O’Connor also ruled in 2021 that businesses that say they’re religious can fire LGBTQ+ people, chipping away at the protections granted by the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton Co.
He ruled the same year that a Catholic hospital doesn’t have to follow federal anti-discrimination laws when it comes to the provision of health care because of the chance that they’d be forced to provide care for a transgender person that affirms their gender, even if the procedure is not one the hospital objects to. His reasoning for the sweeping religious exemption for the Catholic hospital was that Biden and Barack Obama have a “pattern” of religious animus, so they can’t be trusted to enforce the law correctly.
Statement from Kasey Suffredini (he/him), Vice President of Advocacy and Government Affairs for The Trevor Project:
“These latest report findings punctuate much of what we already know about the dangerous and discredited practice of so-called conversion ‘therapy’: it doesn’t work, it is associated with poor mental health outcomes and increased suicide risk, and tragically — it’s still happening.
“Our research has found that 17% of LGBTQ youth in the U.S. reported being threatened with or subjected to conversion therapy — including more than 1 in 5 transgender and nonbinary youth. In addition to being dangerous and detrimental for the young people who undergo it, the harms associated with conversion therapy — such as substance abuse and suicide attempts — cost the U.S. billions of dollars each year.
“As we continue to defend LGBTQ young people, especially trans young people, against a record number of political attacks at the state level, we are grateful to the federal government for sending a powerful message to every LGBTQ young person that they should be proud of who they are and deserve access to affirming environments and care. We are committed to building upon this momentum to protect LGBTQ young people from conversion therapy in every state, and create a safe, accepting world for the transgender community.”
Statement from Mathew Shurka (he/him), Co-Founder of Born Perfect:
“This landmark report is based on a comprehensive survey of existing research, including many new studies and data that have been generated in the eight years since HHS first issued a report on this topic. As the report confirms, conversion therapy causes lasting harm to LGBTQ young people, including by separating them from their families and, for many youths, putting them at risk of depression and suicidality.
“Both as a survivor who was subjected to conversion therapy for five years as a minor and as an advocate on this issue, I am grateful to HHS for compiling this important report and for providing this critical information to families, providers, and policymakers. It is past time for these deadly practices to end.”
Key Takeaways from the Report:
No available research supports the claim that sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) change efforts are beneficial to children, adolescents, or families.
Available research indicates that SOGI change efforts are not effective in altering sexual orientation. Further, no available research indicates that change efforts are effective in altering gender identity.
Available research indicates that SOGI change efforts can cause significant harm.
SOGI change efforts are inappropriate, ineffective, and harmful practices that should not be provided to children and adolescents.
The report also includes recommendations about how families, policymakers, and healthcare providers can support LGBTQ youth, including by ensuring that transgender youth can receive the medically necessary care they need.
Research from The Trevor Project cited in the report:
A 2020 peer-reviewed study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that youth who reported undergoing conversion therapy were more than twice as likely to report having attempted suicide and more than 2.5 times as likely to report multiple suicide attempts in the past year.
A 2020 peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Adolescent Health found that transgender and nonbinary youth were 2 to 2.5 times as likely to experience depressive symptoms, seriously consider suicide, and attempt suicide compared to their cisgender LGBQ peers.
A 2020 peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, found that transgender and nonbinary youth who report experiencing discrimination based on their gender identity had more than double the odds of attempting suicide in the past year compared to those who did not experience discrimination based on their gender identity.
A 2021 peer-reviewed study published in LGBTQ Health found that LGBTQ youth who reported high levels of sexual orientation acceptance from any adult had nearly 40% lower odds of a past-year suicide attempt compared with LGBTQ peers with little to no acceptance.
A 2021 peer-reviewed study published in Transgender Health found that transgender and nonbinary youth who reported gender identity acceptance from adults and peers had significantly lower odds of attempting suicide in the past year.
A 2021 peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of Adolescent Health found that gender-affirming hormone therapy is significantly related to lower rates of depression, suicidal thoughts, and suicide attempts among transgender and nonbinary youth.
A 2022 peer-reviewed study published in JAMA Pediatrics found the practice of conversion therapy on LGBTQ youth, and its associated harms – such as substance abuse and negative mental health outcomes, including depression, anxiety, and suicide attempts – cost the U.S. an estimated $9.23 billion, annually.
###
Born Perfect is a survivor-led campaign created by the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) in 2014 to end conversion therapy by passing laws across the country that protect LGBT children and young people, fighting in courtrooms to ensure their safety, and raising awareness about the serious harms caused by these dangerous practices. http://bornperfect.org/
If you or someone you know needs help or support, The Trevor Project‘s trained crisis counselors are available 24/7 at 1-866-488-7386, via chat at TheTrevorProject.org/Get-Help, or by texting START to 678678.
A federal judge has ordered government officials in Llano County, Texas to return books with LGBTQ+ and anti-racist themes to the county’s public libraries after conservative officials removed them.
Seven Llano County citizens sued county officials when local officials removed 12 titles from county libraries. The books included Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen by Jazz Jennings, In the Night Kitchen by gay children’s book author Maurice Sendak, It’s Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health by Robie H. Harris, and They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group by Susan Campbell Bartoletti.
Additionally, the lawsuit alleged that county officials suspended access to e-books in order to block other titles, dissolved the county’s existing library board, and replaced the board with an “advisory board” containing appointed members who favor book bans. Officials also closed the advisory board’s meetings to the public and staff librarians, CNN reported. The officials’ actions violated county residents’ constitutional rights to free speech and due process, the lawsuit said.
The county had removed the books after community groups complained that they contained “pornographic filth” that promoted “acceptance of LGBTQ views.” Bonnie Wallace, one of the newly appointed advisory board members, even suggested allying with local pastors to “organize a weekly prayer vigil on this specific issue…. May God protect our children from this FILTH.”
The lawsuit stated, “Public libraries are not places of government indoctrination. They are not places where the people in power can dictate what their citizens are permitted to read about and learn. When government actors target public library books because they disagree with and intend to suppress the ideas contained within them, it jeopardizes the freedoms of everyone.”
The lawsuit identified Llano County Judge Ron Cunningham, the county’s commissioners, the library system director, and four library board members as defendants. The defendants said that the books were eliminated as part of the county’s regular “weeding” process.
Last Saturday, federal Judge Robert Pittman ordered the defendants to return the books to the shelves within 24 hours and to update the county libraries’ online cataloging system to show that the books are publicly available. The county is also barred from removing any additional books while the legal case remains open.
In his decision, Pitman said there was no evidence that the removed books were even part of the county’s “weeding” process before the county received complaints about them. Pitman also notes that the 12 books removed contain themes and content that are also contained in numerous books that have nonetheless remained available within the county’s three library branches for years.
“Although libraries are afforded great discretion for their selection and acquisition decisions, the First Amendment prohibits the removal of books from libraries based on either viewpoint or content discrimination,” Pitman said in his decision.
Ellen Leonida, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said, “The government cannot tell citizens what they can or can’t read. Our nation was founded on the free exchange of ideas, and banning books you disagree with is a direct attack on our most basic liberties.” She called Pitman’s ruling a “ringing victory for democracy.”
A new study has found that queer kids aged 10-14 are spending way longer staring at their screens than their straight counterparts. And it’s probably not good for them.
The study says they spend around 10.4 hours on their screens each day. That’s a whopping four hours more than straight kids.
It looked at data on over 10,000 preteens culled between 2018-2020. All the youngsters signed up to take part in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. It’s largest long-term study of brain development and child health in the United States.
The study’s lead author is Jason Nagata, MD, an Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco.
“Lesbian, gay, and bisexual adolescents are more likely to experience school-based bullying and exclusion from peer groups due to their sexual orientation, leading them to spend less time in traditional school activities and more time on screens,” says Nagata in a press statement.
“Texting, and using social media and the internet for virtual communication could be helpful for LGB preteens to find and receive support from other LGB people who may not be available in their local communities.”
On the downside, the kids were also asked if they thought their screen time was problematic. They were asked if they agreed with statements such as, “I play video games so much that it has a bad effect on my schoolwork,” and “I’ve tried to use my social media apps less but I can’t.”
The study concluded that LGB adolescents experienced higher problematic mobile phone and social media use than their straight peers.
Escaping into an online world of gaming and YouTube videos
Nagata told Queerty that turning to the digital world and the internet had benefits but also downsides for gay youngsters.
“Queer youth who don’t have support in their local communities may turn to the internet to find and receive the help they need. Screens can also be helpful to stay in touch with friends and family who live far away.
“Risks of screen use include poorer sleep, less physical activity, and mental health consequences associated with overuse. In another recent study, we found a higher risk of sleep problems among gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth compared to straight youth.”
According to its authors, one of the study’s limitations is that most people don’t identify their sexual orientation until they’re about 17 or 18. Therefore, some of the young participants who said they were straight may turn out to identify as gay when older.
“Some of the adolescents in our study might not have come out yet or fully understand their sexuality. When children in this study were 9-10 years old, 1.5% identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. By age 11-12, 4.4% identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual and 3.8% were questioning. The percentage of study participants who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual will likely increase through their teenage years.”
The study did not seek to ask kids exactly what they were watching online. However, it noted many said they watch a lot of YouTube videos.
Do parents know how much time their kids spend online?
The researchers recommend parents are aware of how much time their children spend online. It suggests they are active in discussing these issues with their offspring.
“Parents should regularly talk to their teens about screen usage and develop a family media use plan. Parents can develop a family media use plan which could include setting limits and encouraging screen-free time, such as before bedtime or during family meals,” he told Queerty.
“We know screen use interferes with sleep, and good sleep is important for mental health.”
He also recommends parents keep an eye on their kids’ eating habits. This is because “Social media use is linked to body image dissatisfaction in LGB youth.”
Is there a set number of hours that kids should spend looking at their screens?
“The American Academy of Pediatrics used to recommend less than two hours of daily screen time for children and adolescents ages 5 to 18,” he replies. “Now they are moving away from giving specific hours because the reality is that most kids spend far more than two hours a day on screens, and not all screen time is equal. Now they recommend creating a plan based on what makes sense for your family given your kids’ screen habits and your family’s situation.”
