Texas Weekly Online

Texas-trans-white
Menu
Menu

Year: 2026

Colorado’s latest Supreme Court loss adds to growing string of culture war defeats

Colorado’s latest Supreme Court loss adds to growing string of culture war defeats

Colorado’s loss in the Supreme Court’s Kaley Chiles case last week marked the third time in recent years the justices have rebuked the state in a major culture-war dispute, adding to a growing pattern of high-profile reversals in cases over speech, religion and anti-discrimination law. The high court’s decision was the latest in a trio of lawsuits that backfired for Colorado, after the Colorado Civil Rights Commission lost in court to a cake baker in a key religious liberty case and after a website designer won a similar battle against the state’s civil rights division. Conservative legal experts said the legal setbacks for the state were not a coincidence. “Colorado seems hell-bent on enforcing its own new orthodoxy of thought, and the Supreme Court has had to come back time and time again to correct them and to remind them that the First Amendment protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, even when the state may disagree with a person’s opinions,” Carrie Severino, president of the legal watchdog JCN, told Fox News Digital. The Supreme Court last week found that Colorado’s conversion therapy ban, signed into law in 2019 by Democratic Gov. Jared Polis, violated the First Amendment because it only restricted talk therapy when the therapy aimed to prevent minors from embracing being transgender or gay. SUPREME COURT BLOCKS COLORADO’S SO-CALLED ‘CONVERSION THERAPY’ BAN ON FIRST AMENDMENT GROUNDS In response to a question from Fox News Digital about the apparent theme, Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Jim Campbell said the state “has proven itself to be no respecter of the First Amendment.” “I don’t think at this point that it’s coincidental,” said Campbell, who represented Chiles before the Supreme Court during oral arguments. “The State of Colorado has shown an utter disregard for the First Amendment rights of people like Kaley Chiles.” JONATHAN TURLEY: THIS BLUE STATE’S LATEST ATTACK ON FREE SPEECH IS AWFUL AND SNEAKY, TOO In Chiles v. Salazar, the high court found 8-1 that the state law discriminated based on viewpoint. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority opinion that such laws suppressing speech on that basis amounted to an “‘egregious’ assault” on the Constitution.  “The First Amendment stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country,” Gorsuch wrote. The case centered on Chiles, a licensed faith-based counselor in Colorado Springs, who argued that she helped youths reach their own stated goals, which she said could include minors seeking counseling on their sexuality and gender identity. COLORADO HOUSE ADVANCES CONVERSION THERAPY LAWSUIT BILL Colorado argued it was allowed to regulate Chiles’ therapy because it amounted to professional conduct and the state wanted to protect minors from Chiles’ perceived harmful counseling. The decision followed a landmark ruling in 2023, when the Supreme Court found 6-3 in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis that the First Amendment barred Colorado from using the state’s Anti-Discrimination Act to force a website designer to create wedding websites for same-sex couples. The high court said in the ruling that the state could not force a person to create content conveying a message that he or she disagreed with. That ruling was viewed at the time as a broad free speech win that followed the Supreme Court’s narrower 2018 decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. In that case, the justices sided with baker Jack Phillips, finding that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had shown unconstitutional hostility toward his religious beliefs that the commission did not show toward other bakers. “The Supreme Court found, at least at the time of Masterpiece Cakeshop, that Colorado’s state agency was acting in a way biased against a certain set of beliefs, and from what we can see that hasn’t changed in the intervening years,” Severino said. “Unfortunately, each time the Supreme Court has corrected them, they’ve only doubled down.” KAGAN TURNS ON LIBERAL ALLY JACKSON WITH FOOTNOTE JAB OVER FREE SPEECH Terry Schilling, president of the conservative American Principles, observed the trend in Colorado, saying in a statement provided to Fox News Digital that Democrats there “will stomp on the rights of anyone who stands in the way of the well-heeled gay and transgender lobby whether it is bakers, doctors, or desperate families.” “It should not take the lengthy legal battles or the Supreme Court to rein in the liberal war against reality,” Schilling said. “That is why fed-up Colorado families are appealing straight to voters to protect children from extremist Democrats,” Schilling added, citing his organization’s efforts to pass conservative ballot initiatives in the state. Outside the First Amendment cases, Colorado has also been a testing ground for other highly polarizing legal fights that made it to the Supreme Court. The justices in Trump v. Anderson unanimously reversed the state Supreme Court’s decision to remove President Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential primary ballot over allegations that he had incited an insurrection, finding the state lacked the authority to remove him.

Dem lawmaker calls for TSA to bring back shoes-off airport security policy

Dem lawmaker calls for TSA to bring back shoes-off airport security policy

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., is demanding that the Transportation Security Administration reintroduce its controversial policy requiring travelers to take off their shoes before going through airport security checkpoints. Duckworth called on the TSA to immediately reverse its move to end the “shoes-off” policy, calling former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s decision last summer to scrap the policy a “reckless act” that may put travelers at risk. “Secretary Noem’s decision to implement a shoes on policy on July 8, 2025, likely without meaningful consultation with TSA, was a reckless act,” Duckworth wrote in a letter to Acting TSA Administrator Ha Nguyen McNeill. “Allowing a potentially catastrophic security deficiency to remain in place for seven months and counting betrays TSA’s mission,” she added. “At a minimum, TSA’s failure to swiftly implement corrective action warrants the immediate withdrawal of Secretary Noem’s reckless and dangerous policy that increases the risk of a terrorist smuggling a dangerous item onto a flight.” NEARLY 20-YEAR SHOE-OFF AIRPORT SECURITY POLICE IS ENDED BY TRUMP ADMINISTRATION This comes after a classified watchdog report found that TSA scanners cannot effectively screen shoes, according to CBS News. Duckworth said the inspector general flagged the issue as urgent to Noem but that no action was taken. Duckworth said that the inspector general found that Noem’s policy shift had “inadvertently created a new security vulnerability in the system.” The former secretary’s failure to take corrective action after the report’s findings was “outrageous, unacceptable and dangerous to the flying public,” Duckworth said. The senator argues that TSA’s lack of response may violate federal law, writing that the agency missed a legally required 90-day deadline to outline corrective actions after receiving the watchdog’s report. “Such inaction violates Federal law, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance and DHS’s own directives,” Duckworth wrote. FLIGHT PASSENGERS SLAM AIRLINES FOR PUSHING EARLY BAG CHECKS EVEN WITH EMPTY BINS ON BOARD The previous policy requiring passengers to take off their shoes during TSA screening was implemented in 2006. The senator wrote that Noem’s policy change reflected a “willingness to gamble the American people’s security,” calling it a “stunning failure of leadership.” “We expect this change will drastically decrease passenger wait times at our TSA checkpoints, leading to a more pleasant and efficient passenger experience,” she said at the time. “As always, security remains our top priority. Thanks to our cutting-edge technological advancements and multi-layered security approach, we are confident we can implement this change while maintaining the highest security standards.” Duckworth accused Noem, who was removed by President Donald Trump last month and replaced by current DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin, of prioritizing politics over security. The senator wrote that Noem’s policy change reflected a “willingness to gamble the American people’s security,” calling it a “stunning failure of leadership.” “Secretary Noem’s willingness to gamble the American people’s security in an unsuccessful attempt to boost her popularity was, and remains, a stunning failure of leadership—particularly following President Trump’s decision to launch an unconstitutional war of choice against Iran that DHS has determined, “is causing a heightened threat environment in the United States,” she wrote.

Dem senator ripped for ‘smear’ of female activist advocating for Swalwell’s accusers: ‘Very bad look’

Dem senator ripped for ‘smear’ of female activist advocating for Swalwell’s accusers: ‘Very bad look’

Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., is facing heat for attempting to discredit a user on X who said sexual misconduct allegations against Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., who is running for governor, will end up “kick[ing] his a–.” Gallego, who has been friends with Swalwell for many years, also defended Swalwell for being “targeted” in a separate post on social media, arguing he is the subject of sexual misconduct allegations because he is “in first place.” Swalwell has fiercely denied the allegations being elevated on social media by Democratically-aligned politicos, including Cheyenne Hunt, a former Capitol Hill staffer who is currently a nonprofit director at the group Gen-Z for Change, and Arielle Fodor, a “political content creator,” teacher and mother who dubs herself “Mrs. Frazzled” online. “This false, outrageous rumor is being spread 27 days before an election begins by flailing opponents who have sadly teamed up with MAGA conspiracy theorists because they know Eric Swalwell is the frontrunner in this race,” Micah Beasley, a spokesperson for Swalwell, said on Tuesday. SWALWELL THREATENS FBI WITH LEGAL ACTION AS PATEL REPORTEDLY WEIGHS ‘FANG FANG’ FILES RELEASE “Yeah I’m gonna be so real with you…Swalwell is a wrap. I’ve seen what I needed to see,” Fodor wrote on X under her “Mrs. Frazzled” pseudonym. “He isn’t going to sue ANYBODY over talking about this because discovery would kick his a–. Why this man ran for governor is BEYOND ME.” In direct response, replying to an X post quoting her comment, Gallego shot back: “This person started to posting for the first time 3 days ago…”  Gallego’s post came in the early hours of the morning Tuesday, and was subsequently followed up with another post defending Swalwell: “When you are in first place, is when they target you,” Gallego said in the second tweet several hours later. “Eric is a fighter and he will win the Governors race.” “WHOA this is a very very bad look by Gallego. There is no reason for him to proactively smear Dem women and advocates when 1) he should just wait for the reporting to come out, and 2) the race isn’t even in AZ,” Democratic campaign strategist Bhavik Lathia said in a reply to Gallego’s initial remark.  “Hey, I just got off the phone with a trusted friend. This is real. Take it seriously. Eric Swallwell cannot be our nominee. There is going to be a lot more coming out soon. I can’t say more right now, but stay tuned,” Lathia wrote in a separate X post earlier this week. ‘USEFUL PUPPET’: ERIC SWALWELL IN THE HOT SEAT AFTER TRAVELING TO DOHA ON SEVERAL QATAR-SPONSORED TRIPS When reached for comment, Gallego and Swalwell did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment, which included questions about whether they wanted to respond to critics who have suggested Gallego is trying to discredit women raising the allegations, as opposed to speaking to them directly.  Gallego and Swalwell have been House colleagues and friends dating back at least a decade, and were paling around in Qatar in 2021 during a now-infamous Qatari Business Council-funded trip to the Middle East nation. They were infamously pictured taking a camel excursion along the Persian Gulf together with their spouses during the trip, which included a stay at a luxury Four Seasons hotel in Qatar and other activities and meetings.  Gallego also served as the national campaign chair of Swalwell’s failed presidential campaign in 2019. A press release announcing Gallego as the campaign chair quoted Swalwell saying, “As two young dads, we babysit for each other’s kids, and share ideas on how to make child care and health care more affordable. Ruben is a dear friend, and I’m honored to have his support in this campaign,” referring to Gallego. “‘Believe all women until it’s politically inconvenient,’” conservative political strategist Alec Sears also said in response to Gallego.   “Ah yes the recency of someone’s social media posts are definitely indicative of whether something’s true or false,” added Curtis Houck, who is the managing editor at the Media Research Center’s Newsbusters. A Substack website tied to Fodor, aka Mrs. Frazzled, says she has an entire subscriber base and runs a newsletter called “Frazzled About Education.” “If I were you, I’d be more worried about my own skeletons instead of trying to discredit women. And the for the record, Mrs. Frazzled has a storied internet platform, and dedication to amplifying Democratic organizations such as Defense of Democracy. You could’ve googled her,” Democrat political strategist, Simone Kathleen Rossi, said in response to Gallego’s post about how Fodor cannot be trusted. “In 13 years, no one in Eric Swalwell’s Congressional office has ever been asked to sign an NDA. Ever. In 13 years, not a single ethics complaint by any staff in his office or any other office has ever been lodged. Ever,” Beasley told media outlets Tuesday.

Top school district slapped with complaint alleging ‘elaborate system’ to keep kids’ gender transitions secret

Top school district slapped with complaint alleging ‘elaborate system’ to keep kids’ gender transitions secret

FIRST ON FOX: One of the largest school districts in the country is facing allegations that it lets teachers decide if parents are sufficiently “supportive” enough to tell them about their child’s desire to switch genders. Trump-aligned America First Legal (AFL) filed a formal complaint against Montgomery County Public Schools, which is in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., with the Departments of Justice and Education, alleging it has been violating the constitution and other federal law through its “Gender Identity in Montgomery County Public Schools” handbook. AFL goes on to allege the school district repeatedly instructs staff to condition parental involvement on whether a parent is deemed “supportive” enough.  Under a section of the plan titled “Communication with Families,” the handbook instructs that faculty should talk with a student to “ascertain the level of support” they receive at home to help make decisions on whether to share with parents that their child requested to change their pronouns, be called by a different name, or even sleep with the opposite biological sex during overnight field trips.  Part of the “system” AFL also describes in its complaint guidance from the handbook that instructs educators to leave such gender-related information out of documents federal law allows parents access to. GOP LAWMAKER VOWS TO GIVE PARENTS MORE POWER AS SCHOOLS ‘BLATANTLY’ VIOLATE STUDENTS’ RIGHTS The watchdog claims Montgomery County Public Schools is violating the Free Exercise, Free Speech and Due Process Clauses in the Constitution, as well as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), with their policies that keep parents in the dark. The district did not immediately comment on the complaint, citing policy not to comment on pending litigation. The non-grade specific, 14-page “Gender Identity” handbook, aimed at ensuring “a culture of respect and equity,” sets forth policies for any student wishing to identify as “transgender” or “gender nonconforming.” The handbook includes a section about developing a “Gender Support Plan” for students to ensure they have “equal access and equal opportunity to participate in all programs and activities at school” and to ensure they are protected from “gender-based discrimination at school.” An element of creating that plan includes filling out an intake form, called Form 560-80. “The completed form must be maintained in a secure location and may not be placed in the student’s cumulative or confidential files,” the plan states. “While the plan should be consistently implemented by all school staff, the form itself is not intended to be used or accessed by other school staff members.” AFL alleges in their complaint that the district “does not explain this directive,” but notes “the only apparent purpose is to prevent the form from being placed in records that parents are entitled to access under FERPA.” TRUMP ADMIN SQUASHES CONTROVERSIAL BIDEN RULE FORCING FOSTER HOMES TO AFFIRM CHILDREN’S LGBTQ+ STATUS There is also a section in the handbook on students’ permanent records, which parents have a right to access under FERPA. “All students have the right to be referred to by their identified name and/or pronoun” the plan asserts. However, it also notes, that “students are not required to change their permanent student records … as a prerequisite to being addressed by the name and pronoun that corresponds to their identified name.” “The school must protect the student’s previous identity once a change to a student’s gender and/or legal name has occurred,” the section continues. The plan cites students’ privacy directly after the section about communicating with families. “All students have a right to privacy. This includes the right to keep private one’s transgender status or gender nonconforming presentation at school,” the plan states. The handbook goes on to say that information about a student’s transgender status constitutes “confidential medical information,” and it argues that sharing such information with parents or guardians is a FERPA violation in and of itself.  Meanwhile, in a different section of the handbook titled “Communication with Families,” educators are explicitly instructed that “prior to contacting a student’s parent/guardian,” they “should speak with the student to ascertain the level of support the student either receives or anticipates receiving from home.” “In some cases, transgender and gender nonconforming students may not openly express their gender identity at home because of safety concerns or lack of acceptance,” the section continues.  “Matters of gender identity can be complex and may involve familial conflict. If this is the case, and support is required, Department of Student Conduct and Appeals (DSCA) should be contacted. In such cases, staff will support the development of a student-led plan that works toward inclusion of the family, if possible, taking safety concerns into consideration as well as student privacy, and recognizing that providing support for a student is critical, even when the family is nonsupportive.” In addition to communication, the plan also extends these parental notification policies to the use of intimate spaces typically reserved for the same gender, including sleeping arrangements for overnight trips. The plan effectively states, according to AFL, that students can both pick which facilities they want to use, including for overnight field trips, and teachers are not allowed to tell parents about it. “Montgomery County Public Schools has constructed an elaborate system designed to keep parents in the dark about some of the most consequential decisions affecting their own children,” said America First Legal’s Ian Prior. “Federal law and the Constitution are unambiguous: parents have the fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children and to access their children’s education records. MCPS’s policies turn both of those principles on their head.”