Connect with us

South Dakota

More than half of states sue to block Biden Title IX rule protecting LGBTQ+ students • South Dakota Searchlight

Published

on

More than half of states sue to block Biden Title IX rule protecting LGBTQ+ students • South Dakota Searchlight


WASHINGTON — Twenty-six GOP-led states are suing the Biden administration over changes to Title IX aiming to protect LGBTQ+ students from discrimination in schools.

Less than a month after the U.S. Department of Education released its final rule seeking to protect against discrimination “based on sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics,” a wave of Republican attorneys general scrambled to challenge the measure.

The revised rule, which will go into effect on Aug. 1, requires schools “to take prompt and effective action when notified of conduct that reasonably may constitute sex discrimination in their education programs or activities.”

The lawsuits hail from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Advertisement

All of the attorneys general in the 26 states suing over the final rule are part of the Republicans Attorneys General Association.

Various advocacy groups and school boards have also tacked onto the states’ legal actions. The lawsuits carry similar language and arguments in vehemently opposing the final rule. They say the new regulations raise First Amendment concerns and accuse the rule of violating the Administrative Procedure Act.

LGBTQ+ advocates say the revised rule offers students a needed protection and complies with existing law.

“Our kids’ experience in schools should be about learning, about making friends and growing as a young person. LGBTQ+ students deserve those same opportunities,” Sarah Warbelow, vice president of legal at the LGBTQ+ advocacy group Human Rights Campaign, said in an emailed statement. “In bringing these lawsuits, these state attorneys general are attempting to rob LGBTQ+ students of their rights, illustrating a complete disregard for the humanity of LGBTQ+ students.”

GOP states band together against new regulations

In the most recent effort, Alaska, Kansas, Utah, and Wyoming sued the Biden administration on Tuesday, accusing the Department of Education of seeking to “politicize our country’s educational system to conform to the radical ideological views of the Biden administration and its allies.”

Advertisement

The lawsuit claims that under the updated regulations, teachers, coaches and administrators would have to “acknowledge, affirm, and validate students’ ‘gender identities’ regardless of the speakers’ own religious beliefs on the matter in violation of the First Amendment.”

In another lawsuit, a group of Southern states —  Alabama, Florida, Georgia and South Carolina — sued the administration in federal court in Alabama over the new regulations.

Republican Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said President Joe Biden “has brazenly attempted to use federal funding to force radical gender ideology onto states that reject it at the ballot box” since he took office.

“Now our schoolchildren are the target. The threat is that if Alabama’s public schools and universities do not conform, then the federal government will take away our funding,” Marshall said in a press release.

The lawsuit also drew praise from Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who said “Biden is abusing his constitutional authority to push an ideological agenda that harms women and girls and conflicts with the truth.” He added that the Sunshine State will “not comply” and instead “fight back against Biden’s harmful agenda.”

Advertisement

Individual states sue the administration 

Meanwhile, some states have opted to file individual lawsuits against the administration.

In Texas, Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the Biden administration late last month in federal court in Amarillo. Paxton filed an amended complaint earlier this week, with two new plaintiffs added.

In an April 29 press release, Paxton said the Lone Star State “will not allow Joe Biden to rewrite Title IX at whim, destroying legal protections for women in furtherance of his radical obsession with gender ideology.”

Oklahoma’s Republican Attorney General Gentner Drummond filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration earlier this month in federal court in Oklahoma. The state’s education department also filed a separate suit against the Biden administration.

A hodgepodge of states 

In late April, Republican attorneys general in Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, West Virginia and Virginia filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration in federal court in Kentucky.

Advertisement

The states argued that the U.S. Education Department “has used rulemaking power to convert a law designed to equalize opportunities for both sexes into a far broader regime of its own making.”

Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi and Montana also sued the Biden administration in late April, echoing the language seen in the other related lawsuits. Seventeen local school boards in Louisiana also joined the states.

Earlier this month, Arkansas, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota also brought a collective legal challenge to the final rule.

A spokesperson for the Education Department said the department does not comment on pending litigation but noted that “as a condition of receiving federal funds, all federally-funded schools are obligated to comply with these final regulations.” They added that the department looks forward “to working with school communities all across the country to ensure the Title IX guarantee of nondiscrimination in school is every student’s experience.”

The department has yet to finalize a separate rule that establishes new criteria for transgender athletes. So far, 24 states have passed laws that ban transgender students from partaking in sports that align with their gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project.

Advertisement

 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement





Source link

South Dakota

Petition to clarify South Dakota proof of citizenship law shot down over technicality

Published

on

Petition to clarify South Dakota proof of citizenship law shot down over technicality


Under state law, any “interested person” can petition state boards to change administrative rules.

But South Dakota citizens and organizations don’t qualify as “persons” under that chapter of state law. The existence of that limitation surprised some members of the state Board of Elections on Wednesday during a meeting called for the express purpose of voting to advance or defeat a rules package the body spent two hours pondering last week.

The League of Women Voters leaned on what it believed to be its right to petition state board earlier this month when it offered the board a series of rule changes the group argued were necessary to standardize the administration of a new state law that requires first-time voter registrants to provide proof of U.S. citizenship.

The board dismissed the petition in a 5-2 vote on Wednesday after one of the board members told the group that the advocacy nonprofit lacks the legal standing to ask for the changes.

Advertisement

Last minute check of statutes calls petitioners’ status into question

The definition of a “person” able to petition a state board for a rule change only includes political subdivisions or agencies of the state, board member and retired Rapid City attorney Scott McGregor said.

McGregor did not attend the initial board meeting last week when the petition was presented, but he reviewed the matter over the weekend, he told South Dakota Searchlight after the meeting. With a 40-year career “making legal arguments based on statutory interpretations,” McGregor also reviewed relevant laws regarding the petition process.

McGregor said he wanted to see if “interested person” had a broad enough definition to include organizations such as the League of Women Voters.

“‘Person’ in various contexts has an awful lot of definitions,” McGregor said. “It depends on the section of the law you’re dealing with and the level of government you’re dealing with.”

Advertisement

McGregor spoke with the Secretary of State’s Office and its legal counsel earlier this week to confirm his interpretation. Deputy Secretary Tom Deadrick told McGregor that other agencies have accepted rule petitions from individuals.

“Even if other agencies have done it,” McGregor told Searchlight,” that doesn’t change the law.”

McGregor told board members he was “shocked” by the limitations.

“That may be an oversight, but that’s all that’s in there,” McGregor said during the meeting.

Board member Kent Alberty said he was “disappointed” that the law’s restrictions on petitioners wasn’t shared with board members earlier. Alberty, during last week’s meeting, said that he saw a need for at least some standardization in procedures in the administration of the citizenship requirement.

Advertisement

Alberty voted against the dismissal on Wednesday, as did Dewey County Auditor Jamalia Franzen.

McGregor told South Dakota Searchlight that the law should be reviewed legislatively.

“There is a certain unfairness to it,” McGregor said.

Acceptable documents for proving one’s citizenship under the new law in question on Wednesday include a birth certificate, passport, driver’s license, non-driver’s identification card or tribal identification card, or “any other type of acceptable documentation” under federal law. Photocopies of most of those documents are acceptable, but registrants using state- or tribally issued identification cards must have the physical cards with them.

If a voter does not provide necessary documentation, they are registered as federal-only voters and cannot participate in local or state elections.

Advertisement

The League of Women Voters proposals included:

  • Allowing photocopies of identification cards, such as tribal IDs and driver’s licenses, to be used as proof of citizenship.
  • Recognizing tribal identification cards from any federally recognized tribe, rather than just the nine tribes in South Dakota.
  • Allowing voters designated as federal-only an opportunity to cast provisional ballots for local elections while appealing their eligibility.
  • Adding specific language to the state’s voter registration form to explain that not offering a physical South Dakota address would cause them to be designated as federal-only voters.
  • Adding language to notifications confirming a voter’s registration clearly saying if the registrant is a federal-only voter, as well as language explaining how to remedy the situation.

South Dakota Secretary of State Monae Johnson was ill during last week’s board meeting, at which the group took testimony from supporters of each rule. No one from her office was on hand to rebut the supporters, but her staff did file written responses in opposition.

On Wednesday, Johnson told the board that the new law, as written, does not allow photocopies of driver’s licenses, only the original card. She added that while no formal appeal process exists for voters registered as federal-only, they can remedy their status by resubmitting their registration with proper documentation.

“The League of Women Voters and other concerned organizations could look at amending the current law in the 2027 legislative session, if that is their wish,” Johnson said.

Johnson will not be seeking re-election for secretary of state in November. She lost the Republican nomination at last month’s state party convention to state Rep. Heather Baxter, who supported the bill that created the new law during the legislative session and will oversee its administration if elected. Baxter will face Democratic nominee Terrence Davis in the general election.

Baxter submitted public comment ahead of Wednesday’s meeting and compared the proposed changes to presenting a photocopy of identification to get through security at the airport or purchase alcohol. The state Department of Public Safety does not accept photocopies of identification documents, Baxter said.

Advertisement

“So why allow the League to make such changes to what law already clearly states as well as other state departments?!” Baxter wrote.

Amy Scott-Stoltz, president of the League of Women Voters of South Dakota, said the organization is “disappointed” in the board’s decision and “reviewing our options” regarding advancing its proposals and challenging the board’s dismissal.

The group’s petition was meant to make sure the new law is “uniformly implemented across the state and that voters and county auditors alike would have clear guidance about their obligations under the law in advance of the November election,” Scott-Stoltz said.

“We intend to continue our work in South Dakota to ensure that every American citizen can access the ballot box,” Scott-Stoltz said.

— This story was originally published on southdakotasearchlight.com.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

South Dakota

SD Lottery Powerball, Lotto America winning numbers for July 8, 2026

Published

on


The South Dakota Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at July 8, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Powerball numbers from July 8 drawing

12-29-37-43-55, Powerball: 18, Power Play: 4

Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Lotto America numbers from July 8 drawing

17-26-31-32-37, Star Ball: 01, ASB: 02

Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Dakota Cash numbers from July 8 drawing

07-11-18-31-33

Check Dakota Cash payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from July 8 drawing

16-18-43-48-50, Bonus: 01

Advertisement

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your prize

  • Prizes of $100 or less: Can be claimed at any South Dakota Lottery retailer.
  • Prizes of $101 or more: Must be claimed from the Lottery. By mail, send a claim form and a signed winning ticket to the Lottery at 711 E. Wells Avenue, Pierre, SD 57501.
  • Any jackpot-winning ticket for Dakota Cash or Lotto America, top prize-winning ticket for Lucky for Life, or for the second prizes for Powerball and Mega Millions must be presented in person at a Lottery office. A jackpot-winning Powerball or Mega Millions ticket must be presented in person at the Lottery office in Pierre.

When are the South Dakota Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 9:59 p.m. CT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 10 p.m. CT on Tuesday and Friday.
  • Lucky for Life: 9:38 p.m. CT daily.
  • Lotto America: 9:15 p.m. CT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Dakota Cash: 9 p.m. CT on Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Millionaire for Life: 10:15 p.m. CT daily.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a South Dakota editor. You can send feedback using this form.



Source link

Continue Reading

South Dakota

South Dakota man faces abuse charges after authorities called to NW Iowa casino

Published

on

South Dakota man faces abuse charges after authorities called to NW Iowa casino


LARCHWOOD, Iowa (KIWA) – A Tea, South Dakota man has been arrested on a felony domestic abuse charge after an incident near Larchwood.

According to a criminal complaint filed with the Lyon County Clerk of Court’s Office by the Iowa State Patrol, 45-year-old Beau Christensen of Tea is accused of assaulting his girlfriend in their hotel room at Grand Falls Casino & Golf Resort near Larchwood. He was arrested on Wednesday, July 8.

In his statement, the state trooper who filed the report says Christensen put his hands around the victim’s neck. The victim stated she could not breathe while this was happening.

Christensen was charged with domestic abuse assault – impeding air or blood flow, a class D felony. If convicted, he could face up to five years in prison. He also faces a misdemeanor charge of possession of marijuana.

Advertisement

He faces a preliminary hearing on Friday, July 10.

At last report, Christensen remained in the Lyon County Jail in Rock Rapids in lieu of a $6000 bond.

Want to get the latest news and weather from Siouxland’s News Source? Follow these links to download our KTIV News app and our First Alert Weather app.

Copyright 2026 KTIV. All rights reserved.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending