RIGHT WING EXTREMISM
‘Under His Eye’: Outrage Swells Over Missouri Attorney General’s Transgender ‘Complaint or Concern’ Online Form
The recently-appointed Attorney General of Missouri is under fire after a social media post revealed his targeting of the state’s transgender residents includes a form anyone across the country can fill out to report a “complaint or concern” about medical treatment given to transgender people in his state.
Attorney General Andrew Bailey, a Republican, who uses language like “woke, left-wing ideology,” “clandestine, shadowy network,” “pernicious threat,” and “gender mutilation” to describe gender-affirming care and the medical professionals who provide it, has already turned Missouri into the first state in the nation that effectively all but bans that medically-necessary and widely-approved care for both minors and adults.
“Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced plans to restrict health care for transgender people weeks ago,” the Associated Press reported last week, “when protesters rallied at the Capitol to urge lawmakers to pass a law banning puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries for children. But the discussion was focused on minors, not adults.”
The Attorney General’s spokeswoman, Madeline Sieren, “clarified in a statement later in the day that adults also would be covered” by his order.
The New York Times this week cites Bailey’s “temporary order severely restricting gender-affirming care,” and observes: “this means gender-affirming medical care has been restricted by law or other means in 13 states, with another two under judicial review.”
Bailey has been very vocal – and very partisan – about his targeting of one of the smallest and most vulnerable populations in his state.
“There’s a woke left-wing ideology that’s masquerading as medicine,” Bailey told Fox News in March (video below), when he announced his emergency order putting in place heavy restrictions on gender-affirming care that all but ban treatment. “There’s a clandestine, shadowy network of these transgender clinics across the state of Missouri that we were unaware of until we launched our investigation into a particular clinic here in St. Louis that a whistleblower came forward and made some very credible allegations that amounts to child abuse.”
“As our investigation’s gone on we’ve discovered what is a pernicious threat to children’s safety across the state of Missouri,” he claimed, falsely, while promising to use “the legal recourse we have available to us now to stand in the gap, to protect kids and give our general assembly time to enact a more thorough bill that will put an end to this kind of gender mutilation.”
“We’re not going to let left-wing ideologues experiment on children here in the state of Missouri.”
That last line was the quote he used to promote his interview with Fox News, an interview that was primarily about his efforts to remove St. Louis’ top prosecutor.
We’re not going to let left-wing ideologues experiment on children here in the state of Missouri. pic.twitter.com/Va7LtPTnoy
— Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) March 25, 2023
That whistleblower’s alleged “very credible allegations” were quickly “called into question,” New York magazine’s Intelligencer reports.
“At least 20 people, including parents of patients and patients themselves, have given accounts that directly challenge the key claims made by [Jamie] Reed in the Free Press.”
Two days before his Fox News interview, Bailey declared his intentions as he promoted an article from the far-right Breitbart website.
“Protecting kids is always worth the effort, and we need to get creative and use every legal recourse we have available to us to stand up and protect kids from this kind of predatory left-wing ideology masquerading as medicine,” he tweeted.
In his exclusive Breitbart interview, Bailey said: “We’re on offense on all fronts,” against gender-affirming treatment. “We marshaled state resources, we’re looking at licensure penalties, we’re looking at Medicaid fraud penalties. We’re looking at consumer protection issues.”
“We’re not finished yet … this is a multifaceted, multi-pronged approach. … It’s worth doing because kids are worth protecting,” Bailey added.
Also in March, Missouri’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported: “World’s leading transgender health experts attack regulations planned by Missouri AG.”
“Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s proposed rules [on transgender medical care] are ‘based upon manipulated statistics, flawed reports, and incomplete data, and prevents the provision of medically-necessary care,’ read a statement from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health,” the Post-Dispatch reported. “The association is made up of nearly 3,000 providers and researchers who care for and study transgender and gender-diverse people across the globe in order to provide the best care.”
AG Bailey has continued to promote his attacks on transgender Missourians – and promote himself – as recently as Wednesday morning, in an announced interview with far-right and publicly censured former Trump attorney Jenna Ellis, on her American Family Radio show. AFR is the “broadcast ministry” of the American Family Association, which appears on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of anti-LGBTQ hate groups.
AG Bailey, in fact, is very comfortable promoting his attacks on transgender Missourians, and himself. After being appointed as Attorney General in January, Bailey must run for and win election next year to keep his job.
On Monday, Bailey posted a well-produced video highlighting tweets praising his actions, some including against transgender people.
“I’m passionate about defending the Constitution, upholding the rule of law, and protecting the liberties of the people of the state of Missouri.I’m proud of the successes we’ve had in my first one hundred days, and I’m excited to see all this office will achieve moving forward,” he wrote.
Among those tweets he chose to include are messages from the Family Research Council, which also appears on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of anti-LGBTQ hate groups, and FRC’s president, Tony Perkins. Also, the far-right extremist group Moms for Liberty.
I’m passionate about defending the Constitution, upholding the rule of law, and protecting the liberties of the people of the state of Missouri.
I’m proud of the successes we’ve had in my first one hundred days, and I’m excited to see all this office will achieve moving forward. pic.twitter.com/qYP2FHKPwn
— Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) April 17, 2023
On Tuesday, a social media post by an author and theology and culture scholar drew a great deal of attention.
“Missouri now has a page where people can report trans individuals and the people who help them to the state,” David W. Congdon wrote, adding, “I hate this place.”
Missouri now has a page where people can report trans individuals and the people who help them to the state. I hate this place. pic.twitter.com/090Z1a2eBe
— David W. Congdon (@dwcongdon) April 18, 2023
He included a screenshot from AG Bailey’s “Transgender Center Concerns Form.”
“Complete this form to submit a complaint or concern about gender transition intervention you have experienced or observed in Missouri,” Bailey’s form reads. “Please complete this form in as much detail as possible.”
There has been great outrage over the form, which requires no proof, no identity check, not even a “Captcha,” as some on social media noted.
“This is sick…wtf” noted journalist Yashar Ali.
“Across the U.S., states increasingly are acting like fascist theocracies. If you think they’ll stop at trans people, you think wrong,” tweeted Ashton Pittman, news editor for the Mississippi Free Press.
“I’m not sure how many steps into the ‘first they came for…’ poem we’re into, but fuck this absolute nonsense,” wrote journalist Matt Novak.
Jeff Sharlet, author of “The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power,” and “C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy,” which led to his Netflix series, “The Family,” simply tweeted, “Under his eye,” a reference to “The Handmaid’s Tale.”
“If Republicans want to dodge the ‘Nazi’ allegations, maybe they shouldn’t have a form urging people to report queers to the state,” wrote actor Abe Goldfarb.
“This is awful,” wrote journalist Richelle Carey.
Author and researcher Jason Colavito: “As godawful as this is, it’s pretty much exactly what Republicans did in the 1950s when they established homosexual snitch lines for spying neighbors to call in tips about suspected gay people so they could be prosecuted.”
Here are a few more responses via Twitter:
“The Nazis also created methods to monitor and control social behavior…”
“This is Nazi shit. If you think they’ll just stop there, you’re insane. It’s time to flee.”
“everyone go spam the shit out of this form…”
“the supreme court making it legal to offer bounties for snitching leads to this, where everyone is a potential informant and nobody trusts anyone near them, only the state. it’s fascism incarnate, and it’s why the “culture war” is an essential part of the conservative project.”
Watch the video and read the tweet above or at this link.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
President Donald Trump and his allies have long accused critics of suffering from the imaginary ailment Trump Derangement Syndrome. Now, an Arizona state senator wants the local health department to conduct a study on the made-up disease.
State Sen. Janae Shamp introduced Senate Bill 1070 on Monday, asking Arizona’s Department of Health Services to “conduct or support research” on TDS, “including its origins, manifestations and long-term effects on individuals, communities and public discourse.” If the bill were passed into law, the department would have a year to submit a report on its findings.
READ MORE: ‘Monstrous’: Trump Blasted for Blaming Rob Reiner’s Death on ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’
Shamp’s bill defines Trump Derangement Syndrome as “a behavioral or psychological phenomenon that is characterized by intense emotional or psychological reactions to Donald J. Trump, his actions or his public presence as observed in individuals or groups.” From there, the bill lays out its reasoning—mainly a laundry list of Trump’s accomplishments, including reducing the corporate tax rate by 14%, eliminating “22 regulations for every new one in 2017”, and “affirming biological truth in federal policy to protect family values.”
“Despite these contributions to America’s prosperity, security 26 and values, ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ (TDS) has emerged since his 2016 campaign,” Shamp wrote.
“TDS has led to significant social harm, with Americans who 33 support President Trump or his policies reporting discrimination, 34 intimidation or ostracism in professional, academic and social settings, 35 further eroding community cohesion,” she added.
The bill borrows heavily from a House bill proposed by Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), according to Tucson.com. It is unknown what chances Shamp’s bill has of passing the Arizona Senate; Davidson’s bill died in committee. But even should it pass, it is unlikely to be signed into law by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs.
When asked if Hobbs would sign the bill, her spokesperson laughed and told a KTVK-TV reporter “You can quote me on that.”
Image via Reuters
Justice Sonia Sotomayor had harsh words for the Supreme Court in her dissent in a ruling allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement to continue to arrest people based on profiling Latinos working low-wage jobs.
Monday morning, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an emergency decision in Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo. The case concerns “Operation At Large,” which deployed ICE agents in the Los Angeles area to car washes, bus stops, farms and other locations believed to be frequented by Latino people who may or may not be undocumented immigrants. On July 11, the Central District Court of California ruled that ICE had to stop Operation At Large until appeals in the case could be heard.
The Court’s ruling contained no official explanation for the ruling, however Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence. In his concurrence, Kavanaugh said the law allowed ICE to “‘briefly detain’ an individual ‘for questioning’” if they have “a reasonable suspicion, based on specific articulable facts, that the person being questioned . . . is an alien illegally in the United States.”
READ MORE: Loyalty Litmus Test? Trump Allies Quietly Prep SCOTUS Short List
Operation At Large, he said, represented “reasonable suspicion” to detain someone on the following factors: “(i) presence at particular locations such as bus stops, car washes, day laborer pickup sites, agricultural sites, and the like; (ii) the type of work one does; (iii) speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent; and (iv) apparent race or ethnicity.”
He added that “apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion” but could be a “‘relevant factor,” and that if someone detained by ICE turned out to be a citizen, they would be “free to go after the brief encounter.”
Sotomayor disagreed that this is what was happening, citing what had happened to other citizens. Jason Gavidia worked at a Los Angeles tow yard that ICE stopped at. Agents repeatedly asked if he was a citizen. They then took his phone, pushed him against a metal fence, twisted his arm, and took away his identification, according to Sotomayor’s dissent.
“Other Operation At Large encounters have included even more force and even fewer questions. For example, agents pulled up in four unmarked cars to a bus stop in Pasadena; ‘the doors opened and men in masks with guns started running at’ three Latino men who were having their morning coffee, waiting to be picked up for work,” she wrote.
“In Glendale, nearly a dozen masked agents with guns ‘jumped out of . . . cars’ at a Home Depot, and began ‘chasing’ and ‘tackl[ing]’ Latino day laborers without ‘identify[ing] themselves as ICE or police, ask[ing] questions, or say[ing] anything else.’ In downtown Los Angeles, agents ‘jumped out of a van, rushed up to [a tamale vendor], surrounded him, and handled him violently,’ all ‘[w]ithout asking . . . any questions.'”
Sotomayor concluded that Operation At Large and the Court’s decision “all but declared that all Latinos, U. S. citizens or not, who work low wage jobs are fair game to be seized at any time, taken away from work, and held until they provide proof of their legal status to the agents’ satisfaction.”
She also condemned the court for not issuing an explanation beyond the concurrence. She alleged that the Court had been eager to “circumvent the ordinary appellate process” when it comes to President Donald Trump and his administration.
“Some situations simply cry out for an explanation, such as when the Government’s conduct flagrantly violates the law,” Sotomayor wrote, adding that Operation At Large and the Court’s ruling clearly violates the Bill of Rights.
“The Fourth Amendment protects every individual’s constitutional right to be ‘free from arbitrary interference by law officers.’ After today, that may no longer be true for those who happen to look a certain way, speak a certain way, and appear to work a certain type of legitimate job that pays very little. Because this is unconscionably irreconcilable with our Nation’s constitutional guarantees, I dissent,” she wrote.
Image via Shutterstock
The right-wing war on knowledge continues as an Arkansas state senator filed a bill Thursday to abolish the State Library as well as the library board.
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Jonesboro), along with State Rep. Wayne Long (R-Bradford), filed Senate Bill 536 on Thursday. The bill would not just remove all references to the State Library from existing laws, but also put the state’s other libraries under the control of the Arkansas Department of Education.
A previous version of the bill, SB184, would have also shuttered the Arkansas Educational Television Commission, which oversees the state’s PBS stations, according to the Arkansas Advocate.
READ MORE: Clean Up Alabama Wants State to Dump ‘Marxist’ American Library Association
The Arkansas State Library is not just a regular library. In addition to providing information to state agencies and lawmakers, it also distributes funding to the other libraries around the state. Under SB536, the Department of Education would take on all its responsibilities. The State Library is officially a part of the Department of Education already, but it operates as an independent organization.
While the proposal may sound like a shuffling-around of duties, the main thrust of the bill is to allow more direct control over the Arkansas library system by controlling the purse strings. The bill would keep libraries from distributing “age-inappropriate materials” to those under 17 years old and sex education materials from those under 12. Libraries would also have to set up a system where those in the community could request that certain items be banned for minors, according to KARK-TV. Those that don’t meet these restrictions will have state funding pulled.
Earlier legislation filed by Sullivan and passed into law includes Act 242, which ended the requirement for library directors to have a master’s degree in library science, the Advocate reported. Sullivan, however, was unsuccessful with a proposed amendment to another bill that would strip funding from libraries affiliated with the American Library Association—meaning most, if not all of them. That amendment was rejected this week over concerns the language in it was too broad, according to the Advocate.
The ALA has been a target of right-wing politicians and activists upset with its free speech stance and fights against censorship. Sullivan in particular has objected to a provision in the ALA’s Library Bill of Rights protecting library access for all ages, the Advocate reported. He also called for the state’s chapter of the ALA to be defunded—despite the fact that it receives no state funding.
Image via Shutterstock
Trump’s Own Posts ‘Gravely Injured’ DOJ’s Investigation Into Fed Chairman: Reporter
‘Sense of Dread’: Ex-Trump DHS Official Fears He Could Stumble Into a Nuclear War
‘Key Indicator’: Expert Warns US Could Be Planning ‘Potential Ground Operation’
‘What Was the Plan?’: White House Faces Fury Over Claim Trump Knew Hormuz Closure Risk
‘Quiet Part Out Loud’: Hegseth Slammed for Lashing Out at CNN’s War Reporting
News3 days agoMelania Trump Hails Herself as a ‘Visionary’ at Women’s History Month Event
News4 days agoTrump Has ‘No Idea’ If Iran War Will Win Him Nobel Peace Prize
News4 days ago‘Trying to Look Cool’: Patel Roasted for Inviting UFC Stars to Train FBI Agents
News2 days agoTrump’s Own Posts ‘Gravely Injured’ DOJ’s Investigation Into Fed Chairman: Reporter
News4 days ago‘Seems to Be No Plan’ Expert Says on Trump Securing Iran’s Nuclear Material to End War
News3 days ago‘Quiet Part Out Loud’: Hegseth Slammed for Lashing Out at CNN’s War Reporting
News2 days ago‘Sense of Dread’: Ex-Trump DHS Official Fears He Could Stumble Into a Nuclear War
News3 days ago‘What Was the Plan?’: White House Faces Fury Over Claim Trump Knew Hormuz Closure Risk
