Connect with us

Midwest

Prisoners have no 'constitutional right' to sex changes, red-state AG tells court in brief backing Trump

Published

on

Prisoners have no 'constitutional right' to sex changes, red-state AG tells court in brief backing Trump

Federal and state authorities are operating within the bounds of the U.S. Constitution when they deny federal prisoners access to taxpayer-funded sex change procedures for transgender inmates, Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita told a U.S. district court this week.

Rokita filed a 24-state amicus brief in support of President Donald Trump’s legal effort to uphold his executive order, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which prohibits the use of federal taxpayer dollars for transgender procedures for inmates.

“If we’re to lose this case, the floodgates will open, and you will see an unending amount of these cases being filed. Costs are going to go up for the state of Indiana to accommodate these unneeded, unnecessary and dangerous surgeries,” Rokita told Fox News Digital in an interview Wednesday.

TRANS INMATE IN PRISON FOR KILLING BABY MUST GET GENDER SURGERY AT ‘EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY’: JUDGE

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita is leading an amicus brief in support of Trump’s executive order that bans federal resources from paying for trans prisoners’ medical procedures. (Getty Images/Fox News Digital)

Advertisement

Rokita is also helping his state fight a two-year legal battle brought on by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of a transgender inmate — convicted of killing his 11-month-old baby — to receive a sex-change surgery.

The federal judge in the case, Clinton appointee Richard Young, repeatedly ruled that the inmate must be given gender surgery at the “earliest opportunity,” despite Indiana’s law barring the state Department of Corrections from using taxpayer funds to cover sex reassignment surgeries for inmates. Rokita has filed an appeal of that decision.

“It’s absolutely imperative that not only President Trump’s executive orders stand, but that Indiana wins this case,” Rokita said. 

ACLU SUES INDIANA OVER DENIAL OF SEX REASSIGNMENT SURGERY FOR INMATE WHO STRANGLED 11-MONTH-OLD TO DEATH

trans inmate, left; ACLU sign at right

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is suing the Indiana Department of Corrections on behalf of a transgender inmate, Jonathan C. Richardson, also known as Autumn Cordellionè, who was convicted of strangling his 11-month-old stepdaughter to death in 2001. (Indiana Department of Corrections/Getty Images)

Both Rokita and the Trump administration’s cases deal with the accusation that prohibiting so called “gender-affirming care” for inmates violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Advertisement

In the Trump case, an inmate anonymously identified as Maria Moe, is being represented by advocacy groups GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders and National Center for Lesbian Rights and Lowenstein Sandler LLP. Once Trump signed the executive order, Moe was transferred to a men’s prison facility, and BOP records changed the sex from “female” to “male,” the complaint says.

Several inmates who signed onto the lawsuit as plaintiffs were also transferred to men’s facilities to match their biological sex, but are now being sent back to women’s facilities after U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee, issued a preliminary injunction blocking the executive order last week.

TRANS INMATE WHO KILLED BABY AND IDENTIFIES AS MUSLIM WOMAN SUES CHAPLAIN FOR ALLEGEDLY NOT ALLOWING HIJAB

White House main photo; right inset: President Trump

President Trump’s ‘two-sexes’ executive order has faced opposition in courts.  (Getty Images/AP Images)

“The politics of some of these courts these days, and playing into this is really a head scratcher,” Rokita said. “But the chaos that would ensue in the prison system, with all these jailhouse lawyers, all of a sudden… the expense of the taxpayer would be astronomical.”

Advertisement

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

South Dakota

Jury deadlocks on manslaughter charge in fatal South Dakota crash

Published

on

Jury deadlocks on manslaughter charge in fatal South Dakota crash


KENNEBEC, S.D. — A Lyman County jury reached a partial verdict Thursday in the second-degree manslaughter trial of Jan Bothma, convicting him on two misdemeanor charges but deadlocking on the most serious count.

Bothma, 32, was found guilty of reckless driving, a Class 1 misdemeanor, and failure to make a proper stop at a stop intersection, a Class 2 misdemeanor. However, on count 1 — second-degree manslaughter — the jury was unable to reach a unanimous decision, resulting in a hung jury.

A hung jury means that despite deliberation, jurors could not agree on a verdict. As a result, a mistrial was declared on the manslaughter charge. A mistrial due to a hung jury is not considered a final judgment, so the state is allowed to retry the case.

Lyman County State’s Attorney Steve Smith confirmed that he intends to pursue a new trial on the manslaughter count.

Advertisement

After the verdict was read, Smith turned to the family of Chance Veurink and apologized, reassuring them that “this is not done.” Members of the Veurink family sat tear-struck in the courtroom, visibly emotional as the outcome was announced.

Bothma will be sentenced on July 17 for the two misdemeanor convictions. In South Dakota, a Class 1 misdemeanor is punishable by up to one year in county jail and/or a $2,000 fine, while a Class 2 misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of 30 days in jail and/or a $500 fine.

The charges stem from an April 25, 2024, collision near Presho at the intersection of 305th Avenue and South Dakota Highway 248. Authorities say Bothma failed to stop a Case IH sprayer at a posted stop sign, causing a crash that killed 33-year-old Chance Veurink, of Vivian. Bothma, who is originally from South Africa and was in the area on a work visa for a local farming operation, was operating the equipment at the time of the crash.

In closing arguments, defense attorney George Johnson emphasized the state’s burden to prove recklessness beyond a reasonable doubt, noting that under the jury instructions, a conviction for second-degree manslaughter required a finding of reckless driving. Johnson argued that Bothma’s actions amounted to “imperfect logic and a bad choice,” describing them as negligent, but not reckless. Prosecutors countered that Bothma made a conscious decision to take a reckless risk by running the stop sign, despite understanding the potential consequences.

Jurors began deliberating shortly before noon Thursday. By late afternoon, they informed the court they could not come to an agreement on the manslaughter charge, prompting the court to declare a mistrial on that count.

Advertisement

The trial took place over four days at the Lyman County Courthouse, with a jury composed of eight men and four women.

The Mitchell Republic was unable to obtain comment from the defense team, the defendant, or his wife, who was with him in the courtroom, following the verdict.

Jennifer Leither joined the Mitchell Republic in April 2024. She was raised in Sioux Falls, S.D. where she attended Lincoln High School. She continued her education at South Dakota State University, graduating in December 2000 with a bachelor’s degree in Journalism. During her time in college, Leither worked as a reporter for the campus newpaper, The Collegian. She also interned for Anderson Publications in Canistota, SD the summer of 2000. Upon graduation, Leither continued to reside in the Sioux Falls area and worked as a freelance writer for the Argus Leader for a number of years.
/jennifer-leither

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

At ‘crisis level’ capacity, Wisconsin Humane Society drops dog adoption fees temporarily

Published

on

At ‘crisis level’ capacity, Wisconsin Humane Society drops dog adoption fees temporarily


play

Advertisement
  • The shelter is at crisis capacity due to a new walk-in surrender policy implemented June 1, leading to a significant increase in animals.
  • The policy change aims to support families struggling with systemic issues like affordable housing, rising pet costs, and vet shortages.
  • The Humane Society encourages fostering to create space and offers a “no time limit” promise for animals awaiting adoption.

Saying it’s at a “crisis level,” the Wisconsin Humane Society has temporarily lowered its adoption fees for dogs.

The fees, which typically range from $199 to $299, have been reduced to $75 through June 11. The fee for “benchwarmer” dogs, which have been at the Humane Society at least seven days, has been reduced to $25.

In a June 4 social media post, the Humane Society said, “The Wisconsin Humane Society is at crisis level, and we are in desperate need of dog adopters and canine foster parents. We have nearly 400 dogs in care across our organization and are drastically reducing adoption fees in hopes of finding as many great matches as possible.”

The shelter is at crisis capacity because of a policy that started June 1.

“We moved to a walk-in surrender model,” said Angela Speed, the Wisconsin Humane Society’s vice president of marketing & communications. “We used to require appointments, but we recognize that appointments for people needing to surrender their pets were booking months out.”

The policy also was implemented to support families in light of systemic issues that make pet ownership difficult, Speed said, including the lack of affordable housing that allows large dogs, rising costs of pet ownership and a national shortage of veterinarians.

Advertisement

As a result of the new policy, it’s caring for just under 400 dogs — about 100 more than in June 2024.

The Humane Society’s Milwaukee campus has started moving dogs to its other five Wisconsin locations but is quickly running out of space.

In addition to lowering the adoption fees, the Humane Society is encouraging people to foster dogs.

“We really use our foster network, when our shelters are full, to create more space for incoming animals in the shelter,” Speed said.

Advertisement

Dogs are fostered for a few reasons, she said. Some dogs need a shelter break for a day, while others need to be fostered for several weeks due to medical conditions or behavior observation.

Fostering is something that doesn’t require a lot of space, and Speed said there’s no such thing as a perfect foster home. There are people who foster while living in smaller apartments or with other animals in their house.

“There’s a type of animal for just about every situation, and of course, you get first dibs if you fall in love,” she said.

The promotion is meant to address the shelter’s current capacity, but Speed said there’s an option that will never be on the table.

“The Wisconsin animals in our adoption program have as long as it takes to find a new home,” Speed said. “We never euthanize for space or time, and that’s a promise we’ve kept for 26 years.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Midwest

Wisconsin man fired for refusing to use preferred pronouns appeals to Trump administration

Published

on

Wisconsin man fired for refusing to use preferred pronouns appeals to Trump administration

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: Spencer Wimmer, a Wisconsin man, is asking the Trump administration to intervene after he says he was fired for refusing to use preferred pronouns that conflict with a person’s biological sex—forcing him, he claims, to choose between his livelihood and his faith.

While the Trump administration has moved to roll back DEI and gender ideology workplace requirements, Wimmer, a devout Christian, argues that private citizens are still experiencing workplace discrimination tied to such policies.

Now, after filing a religious discrimination complaint through the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) to the Trump U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), he said he hopes President Donald Trump will do something about it. 

In an interview with Fox News Digital, Wimmer said that he had worked hard to be a “model employee” during his five years at Generac and was in good standing with the company, having received several positive performance reviews and promotions. He said he expected to have a long, fruitful career at the power equipment company. That is, until he was suddenly pulled into a meeting with human resources and confronted about his refusal to use someone’s preferred pronouns.

Advertisement

‘UNLAWFUL DEI-MOTIVATED’ WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION TO BE ROOTED OUT BY TRUMP’S NEW ACTING EEOC CHAIR

Wisconsin man Spencer Wimmer is asking the Trump administration to fight on his behalf after he says he was forced to choose between his livelihood and “love for God,” and was ultimately fired for his religious belief in not using “preferred pronouns” that conflict with a person’s biological sex.   (Fox News Digital and Andrew Harrer/Getty Images)

Wimmer says that his refusal to use preferred pronouns is rooted in his deeply held Biblical, religious belief that there are only two genders and that a person cannot switch between one and the other.

He explained that he had prior experience working with transgender people and even had a good working relationship with one of his colleagues who was transgender. However, after Wimmer had to clarify with HR that he could not in good conscience use his transgender colleagues’ preferred pronouns, he was reprimanded for “unprofessional” conduct.

According to WILL, the firm representing Wimmer, Generac HR representatives told him that his request to refrain from using transgender pronouns on religious grounds “did not make any sense.” Wimmer was issued a written disciplinary action note that stated “refusal to refer to an employee/subordinate by their preferred name/pronouns is in violation of the company’s Code of Business Conduct and No Harassment Policy.”

Advertisement

After an entire month in which he said he felt both targeted and bullied for his religious beliefs, Wimmer was fired from his supervisor role at Generac Power Systems on April 2. According to WILL, he was not allowed to collect his personal belongings and was escorted out of the building.

Wimmer described the entire episode as “heartbreaking.”

THE SUPREME COURT APPEARS TO SIDE WITH PARENTS IN RELIGIOUS LIBERTY DISPUTE OVER STORYBOOKS

Trump and Andrea Lucas

Andrea Lucas, President Donald Trump’s pick to serve as acting chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), vowed to make rooting out diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices in the workplace a priority.  (Getty/EEOC )

“I was asked to choose between my livelihood and my love for God and my beliefs,” said Wimmer, adding that it was very emotional having everything kind of ripped out from under me.”

In its complaint to the EEOC, WILL argues that Generac violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. WILL asserts that Generac violated Wimmer’s rights despite there being no harassment complaints filed against him.

Advertisement

Cara Tolliver, an attorney with WILL, told Fox News Digital that she believes his case carries a broader significance that could impact Americans across the country.

She said that Wimmer’s case puts recent Supreme Court precedent set in a 2023 case called Groff v. DeJoy to the test, challenging the validity of an employer’s compelled gender affirmation policy against an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs.

“Employers, I think, have kind of become seemingly fixated on a lot of identity politics in the workplace, including the topic of gender identity,” she said. “But it’s crucial to keep in mind that even where Title VII may provide some protection to employees against workplace discrimination and harassment on the basis of a gender identity, this does not supersede or eliminate Title VII protections against religious discrimination and the fact that religious discrimination is illegal.”

SUPREME COURT ALLOWS TERMINATIONS OF INDEPENDENT AGENCY BOARD MEMBERS FOR NOW

Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court is shown at dusk on June 28, 2023, in Washington, DC (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Wimmer told Fox News Digital that he “never asked Generac to choose between me and then this other individual.”

Advertisement

“There was absolutely a way for us to work together and have a compromise where we continue to have a professional environment,” he said. “Unfortunately, there are individuals and there are organizations and structures in place that won’t let you have compromise. The fact that you have these beliefs is unacceptable to them. So, no amount of compromise is possible.”

In response to Fox News Digital’s request for comment, a spokesperson said: “We do not comment on employment matters nor comment on pending litigation.”

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading

Trending