Connect with us

Politics

Oklahoma measure seeks to make school district superintendents an elected position

Published

on

Oklahoma measure seeks to make school district superintendents an elected position

Oklahoma will consider a new measure to make the role of school district superintendent an elected position in response to a spate of controversial situations involving scholastic leaders, Fox News Digital has learned.

There have been allegations and news reports about several issues: the refusal to remove “pornographic books” from school libraries, the dismissal of a teacher for failure to comply with a COVID-19 face mask mandate, and media coverage of “nothing [being] done” in response to reports a school football coach was bragging about sexual conquests with parents.

In 2021, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt called firings of mask-averse teachers “preposterous” and said their talents are needed more than ever.

“This is about a school district not following state law — this isn’t a debate about masks,” he said, after the Oklahoma City district reportedly fired multiple educators, adding the state previously banned such firings.

STATE SCHOOLS CHIEF BILLS KAMALA HARRIS $474M FOR EDUCATION COSTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

Advertisement

In February, Oklahoma State Superintendent of Schools Ryan Walters — who is an elected official himself — threatened to lower the accreditation of Edmond, Oklahoma, schools if it didn’t remove the books “The Glass Castle” and “Kite Runner” from its high school libraries.

Walters called the inaction “subversion of accountability,” though Edmond’s superintendent said the state lacked authority to remove the books based on a 1997 district policy.

In another case, in Edmond, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz from neighboring Texas, among others, blasted videos showing a portion of a school fundraiser wherein students were licking each other’s toes. 

In a public statement, school officials appeared to celebrate the event:

Advertisement

“This afternoon, Deer Creek High School announced a grand total of $152,830.38 raised for Not Your Average Joe Coffee, an organization created to ‘inspire our community by including students and adults with intellectual, developmental and physical disabilities,” school staff wrote. 

“All participants in the assembly were students who signed up for the game(s) they played ahead of time. No Deer Creek faculty or staff participated in any of the games during this Clash of Classes assembly,” a portion of the latter part of the statement read.

LANDMARK BILL TARGETS HIDDEN FOREIGN FUNDING IN SCHOOLS AS OFFICIALS WARN OF CCP INFLUENCE

Walters called the fundraiser “filth,” and Cruz said it was “child abuse.”

In another district on the Arkansas line, now-former Muldrow Superintendent Leon Ashlock resigned after driving drunk and crashing a school vehicle on Creek Turnpike. Two 100-proof bottles of cinnamon schnapps were found in its console, according to KOCO.

Advertisement

Walters told Fox News Digital on Wednesday that a case involving a school’s response to an athletic director’s criminal exploits with a student also drew his attention.

“Even in a conservative state like Oklahoma, where voters have overwhelmingly made clear they want the radical progressive policies of the left out of public schools, we continually see superintendents defying their will, ignoring their concerns, and refusing to take action necessary to improve education outcomes while protecting Oklahoma children,” Walters said.

“This has to end.”

“And, the best way to do that is by requiring superintendents to be elected by the voters.”

Advertisement

Walters called the legislation a common-sense solution to efforts to improve education for Sooner State children.

Walters previously made headlines when he led his state in becoming the first to appropriate funding toward supplying a Bible to each school. The official said the move blunts “woke curricula” and provides students a “historical document” that the founders used to form their government.

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.

Politics

GOP AG predicts which side has advantage in historic SCOTUS transgender case with 'divided' justices

Published

on

GOP AG predicts which side has advantage in historic SCOTUS transgender case with 'divided' justices

In oral aruments, Supreme Court justices discussed the high-profile, first-of-its-kind case involving transgender medical treatment for children. 

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, the lawmaker at the center of the suit against the Biden administration, told Fox News Digital that over the next few months, the justices will be “thinking a lot about the case.” 

When asked whether he ever foresaw himself in such a high-profile legal matter, he said, “not remotely.”

“I do think the fact that there’s so much disagreement weighs in favor of our side,” Skrmetti said in a phone interview. “This is an area where the court really shouldn’t come in and pick a winner. The data is still very underdeveloped.”

SOTOMAYOR COMPARES TRANS MEDICAL ‘TREATMENTS’ TO ASPIRIN IN QUESTION ABOUT SIDE EFFECTS DURING ORAL ARGUMENTS

Advertisement

Activists hold a rally outside the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., as the court hears oral arguments in the transgender treatments case Skrmetti vs. U.S. on Dec. 4, 2024. (Fox News Digital)

“All the research that both sides point to is unresolved,” Skrmetti said. “This is an unsettled area of science, and in situations like that, the best way to resolve it is through the democratic process. Our legislators appropriate people to deal with that uncertainty and make the call for each individual state.”

The justices appeared divided on Wednesday after oral arguments, and the three appointed by former President Trump could be the key to deciding the socially divisive question. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett asked tough questions of both sides, and Justice Neil Gorsuch did not speak during the marathon public session.

For its part, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Equal Protection Clause, which ensures equal treatment under the law for similarly situated individuals, bars states from prohibiting medical providers from administering puberty blockers and hormones to help minors transition to a different gender. The case is U.S. v. Skrmetti and is challenging Tennessee’s state law which bans medical procedures for minors.

Outside the court, hundreds of demonstrators rallied both for and against gender transition treatments for children. One of those rally-goers, detransitioner and activist Chloe Cole, told Fox News Digital in an interview that if the justices oppose the ban on trans medical treatments, “it’s going to make things a lot more difficult on legislative fronts in terms of protecting our children and our youth.”

Advertisement

‘THE PENDULUM IS SWINGING’: EXPERTS WEIGH IN ON HISTORIC SCOTUS TRANSGENDER CASE AMID ORAL ARGUMENTS

Detransitioner and activist Chloe Cole outside the Supreme Court building during oral arguments in the <i>Skrmetti vs. U.S.</i> case on Dec. 4, 2024. 

Detransitioner and activist Chloe Cole outside the Supreme Court building during oral arguments in the Skrmetti vs. U.S. case on Dec. 4, 2024.  (Fox News Digital)

“If we want to create a precedent for other states, for first this law, to be upheld in courts and for other states to be upheld as well, we have to do this now,” Cole said.

Cole, who detransitioned at the age of 16, told Fox News Digital that doctors had done an “incredible disservice” to her at a young age by helping her transition in the first place.

“I’m never going to even have a chance at nursing my children with what God gave me,” Cole said. “An incredible disservice has been done to me by these irresponsible doctors who knew better. They knew better than to do this to a child. They still chose to do it. But they messed with the wrong kid, and I am going to make sure there is never another child in America who is abused in the same way I was ever again.”

The court’s decision could have sweeping implications, potentially shaping future legal battles over transgender issues, such as access to bathrooms and school sports participation. A decision is expected by July 2025.

Advertisement

“So if the court puts a thumb on the scale and says that the courts could be second-guessing state governments on these issues, I think you’re going to see an inhibited debate, and we’ve seen this happen before in other contexts where democracy is subverted by judges who step a little too far into the policy arena, and that ultimately hurts the country,” Skrmetti said. 

“It de-legitimates the government,” he added. “It makes people feel alienated from the political process. The alternative is it stays open to our democratic system of resolving disagreements, and you’ll see a lot of debate, and different states will go in different directions, and over time, we’ll have better research, and people will have a chance to debate this extensively, and that’s just the better way to come to a resolution on such a hot button issue where the Constitution is silent.”

The Justices’ decision may also influence broader debates about whether sexual orientation and gender identity qualify as protected classes under civil rights laws, akin to protections for race and national origin.

SUPREME COURT WEIGHS TRANSGENDER YOUTH TREATMENTS IN LANDMARK CASE

A court sketch depicts the United States Supreme Court hearing oral arguments regarding abortion rights

A court sketch depicts the United States Supreme Court hearing oral arguments regarding abortion rights on Wednesday, April 24, 2024.  (William J Hennessy Jr.)

Advertisement

When asked whether Skrmetti believes the incoming Trump administration could persuade the justices one way in the case, he said, “It’s ultimately up to the court how they want to handle that.” Trump promised during his campaign he would outlaw transgender medical procedures for minors and open the doorway to allowing individuals to sue medical providers for conducting them.

“But there is a path there for them to continue this, and I think it’s important that we get clarity soon, because there are so many cases involving these issues, and the lower courts have not been consistent and are looking for guidance, and it would do everyone good to have a more clear answer to the state of the law,” he said.

Fox News Digital’s Shannon Bream and Bill Mears contributed to this report. 

Continue Reading

Politics

Supreme Court sounds ready to OK laws that ban hormone treatments for trans teens

Published

on

Supreme Court sounds ready to OK laws that ban hormone treatments for trans teens

The Supreme Court’s conservatives said Wednesday they are inclined to uphold state laws in half the nation that prohibit the use of hormone treatments for transgender teens.

Led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., they spoke of an evolving medical debate over the use of puberty blockers and sex hormones for adolescents who suffer from gender dysphoria.

Britain recently joined Sweden and Finland in sharply limiting these treatments for adolescents, they said. Roberts said the justices should be wary deciding disputes among medical experts.

“Doesn’t that make a stronger case of us to leave those determinations to the legislative bodies rather than try to determine them for ourselves?” Roberts asked Solicitor Gen. Elizabeth Prelogar as she opened her argument.

“My understanding is that the Constitution leaves that question to
the people’s representatives rather than to nine people, none of whom is a doctor.”

Advertisement

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh agreed.

“It just seems to me the Constitution doesn’t take sides on how to resolve this,” he said.

“There is obviously an evolving debate” about the risks and benefits of these medical treatments, he said. “England’s pulling back and Sweden’s pulling back. It strikes me as a pretty heavy yellow light, if not red light, for this court to come in, the nine of us, and to constitutionalize the whole area when the rest of the world is … pumping the brakes on this kind of treatment.”

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Amy Coney Barrett appeared to agree.

Alito chided the Biden administration’s solicitor general for telling the court there was an “overwhelming” medical consensus in favor of prescribing hormones for adolescents with gender dysphoria.

Advertisement

In response, Prelogar said Britain did not adopt a total ban on such treatments, even if they are now quite limited.

Meanwhile, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who wrote the court’s 2020 opinion that extended federal antidiscrimination protection to transgender employees, asked no questions during the three-hour argument.

However, the court’s three liberals argued strongly that the conservative state laws discriminate against transgender teens and should be struck down.

“Usually parents get to decide” what is the best medical treatment for their child, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said. “But Tennessee has decided to override them.”

Since 2021, Tennessee and 23 other states have adopted laws that forbid prescribing hormones and puberty blockers for those younger than 18 for the purpose of gender transition.

Advertisement

In defense of those laws, Tennessee Atty. Gen. Jonathan Skrmetti argued that the practice of medicine is a matter for the state, and lawmakers there said the hormone treatments are risky and unproven for adolescents.

The Biden administration urged the court to hear the Tennessee case and to rule the law discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Prelogar and ACLU attorney Chase Strangio urged the court to rule that because the laws discriminate based on sex and gender, they are suspect and should be struck down.

At a minimum, they said, the court should send the Tennessee case back to a lower court judge to decide whether the state can justify what Prelogar and Strangio called gender-based discrimination.

Strangio said the Tennessee law “has taken away the only treatment that relieved years of suffering for each of the adolescent plaintiffs.”

Advertisement

A ruling in favor of Tennessee would be a victory for the conservative states, but it would not directly affect California or other Democratic states, which put no similar limits on medical treatments for transgender youths.

However, President-elect Donald Trump campaigned against what he called “left-wing gender insanity.” Upon taking office, he said, he would instruct federal agencies to “cease all programs that promote the concept of sex and gender transition at any age.”

It’s also possible that after taking office in January, Trump’s Justice Department appointees could notify the court they would like to drop the government’s appeal in the Tennessee case.

The justices could choose to dismiss the case without ruling, or they could proceed by focusing only on the appeal lodged by the ACLU.

Kavanaugh and Barrett asked about competitive school sports and whether officials may limit participation by transgender girls. But they agreed that question will not be resolved in this case.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Iowa sues Biden administration to verify status of 2,000 registered voters who may be noncitizens

Published

on

Iowa sues Biden administration to verify status of 2,000 registered voters who may be noncitizens

Join Fox News for access to this content

You have reached your maximum number of articles. Log in or create an account FREE of charge to continue reading.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

Iowa is suing the Biden administration over its alleged refusal to provide access to the citizenship status information of more than 2,000 registered voters whose status was questioned ahead of the 2024 election.

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and Secretary of State Paul Pate filed the lawsuit on Tuesday, which claims U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) “would not hand over” its “list of noncitizens illegally registered to vote in Iowa.”

Advertisement

Federal authorities’ “failure meant that the State had to rely on the best — imperfect — data it had available to ensure that no Iowan’s vote was canceled by an illegal, noncitizen vote,” Pate and Bird said in a joint statement.

Along with USCIS, the lawsuit names the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as defendants.

IOWA REP. MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS BEATS DEM CHALLENGER IN STATE’S 1ST CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate, pictured above, and Attorney General Brenna Bird sued the Biden administration on Tuesday for access to information on the citizenship status of more than 2,000 registered voters. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, File)

Fox News Digital reached out to DHS for comment but did not immediately hear back.

Advertisement

The complaint details how state election officials checked voter rolls against a list of people who identified themselves as noncitizens with the state’s Department of Transportation. The vast majority of the 2,176 names had subsequently registered to vote or voted, meaning that some of those people could have become naturalized citizens in the lapsed time.

Polling place

Pate and Bird said the government’s refusal to hand over the information forced the state to rely on “imperfect” data from its Department of Transportation. (iStock)

Pate told county elections officials during the state’s early voting to challenge the ballots cast by any of the individuals named on the list and have them cast a provisional ballot instead.

Pro-voting groups sued Pate over the move, though days later a judge ruled against them and allowed those named on Pate’s list to cast provisional ballots.

MISSOURI LAW REQUIRING PHOTO ID TO VOTE REMAINS INTACT: ‘HUGE WIN FOR ELECTION SECURITY’

At least 500 of the identified individuals proved their citizenship status and had their votes counted, the Des Moines Register reported, citing preliminary information collected from 97 of the state’s 99 counties.

Advertisement

Another 74 ballots were rejected, according to the Register, mostly because those people did not return to prove their citizenship status.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Most of the people on Pate’s list did not vote in the 2024 election, according to the Register’s data from county auditors.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending