List of All Articles with Tag 'ame'

A federal judge in Arkansas has permanently struck down the state’s first-in-the-nation ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth, finding that the law violates the constitutional rights of trans patients, their families and health providers. The law – the first-such ban on affirming healthcare for trans youth in the US – is permanently enjoined following a weeks-long trial, marking the first such ruling in the country. A decision from US District Judge Jay Moody, who was appointed to the federal judiciary by Barack Obama, joins a wave of legal victories in federal courts for transgender rights and the rights of trans youth to access medically recommended and potentially life-saving care. The law prohibited doctors from providing hormone therapies, puberty blockers or affirming surgeries to anyone under 18 years old. It also barred state funds or insurance coverage for affirming care for people under 18 and allowed insurance companies to refuse to cover affirming treatment for people of any age. Judge Moody had temporarily blocked the law in 2021 as a legal challenge from a group of families with trans children played out. In his ruling on 20 June, Judge Moody determined that the law unconstitutionally discriminates against transgender people and their families by infringing on their due process and rights to equal protection under the law. He also determined that the law violate the First Amendment rights of doctors by prohibiting them from referring their patients elsewhere. Judge Moody argued that attorneys for the state of Arkansas failed to contest the “extensive clinical experience” from doctors who testified in the case and the “decades of clinical experience demonstrating the efficacy of gender-affirming medical care.” He also debunked the state’s medical claims by pointing to testimony from its own witness and ruled that the state failed to prove any of its claims that affirming treatment is “ineffective or riskier than other medical care provided to minors,” among other statements. Arkansas “failed to prove that its interests in the safety of Arkansas adolescents from gender transitioning procedures or the medical community’s ethical decline are compelling, genuine, or even rational,” Judge Moody wrote. He determined that plaintiffs proved that they would “suffer immediate and irreparable harm” if the law was allowed to take effect, “outweighed by any potential harm to the State of Arkansas caused by the entry of a permanent injunction.” “I’m so grateful the judge heard my experience of how this health care has changed my life for the better and saw the dangerous impact this law could have on my life and that of countless other transgender people,” said Dylan Brandt, a 17-year-old transgender boy who joined the lawsuit challenging the law. “My mom and I wanted to fight this law not just to protect my health care, but also to ensure that transgender people like me can safely and fully live our truths,” he said in a statement through the ACLU of Arkansas. “Transgender kids across the country are having their own futures threatened by laws like this one, and it’s up to all of us to speak out, fight back, and give them hope.” Chase Strangio, deputy director for transgender justice at the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, said the judge’s deicision provides “enormous relief” to trans youth and their families in the state. “In state after state, transgender people are being forced to fight for our most basic rights, including access to the health care many of us need to live,” he added. “This victory shows that these laws, when tested by evidence, are indefensible under any standard of constitutional review.” The ruling comes days after a federal judge appointed by Donald Trump temporarily blocked a similar ban on affirming healthcare in Indiana law. Another federal court ruling in Florida also partially blocked state law impacting access to such care, delivering a ruling that eviscerated the state’s anti-trans policies and condemned the bigotry that fuelled such legislation. Over the last year, state lawmakers across the country introduced a historic number of bills targeting LGBT+ Americans, including hundreds aimed at young trans people, as part of a growing campaign among Republican lawmakers wielding anti-trans attacks now dominating their platforms and right-wing media campaigns. Children’s hospitals and health providers offering care for trans youth also have faced an unprecedented wave of harassment and threats. At least 20 states have enacted laws or policies banning affirming healthcare for young trans people. But an increasing number of state-level and federal court decisions have blocked them from going into effect, for now. Read More Trump-appointed federal judge blocks Indiana’s ban on gender-affirming care for trans youth Pioneering transgender lawmaker has advice for pushing back against transphobic bills Neo-Nazis can’t stop Pride in Montana: ‘Yes, we are under attack. But we will not be quiet’

How much is the newest handheld gaming device

A man has appeared in court for the first time on four murder charges as he’s accused of shooting and killing a family with whom he shared a duplex in Kellogg, Idaho. Majorjon Kaylor, 31, appeared in Shoshone County Magistrate court in an orange jumpsuit on Tuesday morning, according to The Spokesman-Review. Mr Kaylor is facing allegations that he killed Kenneth and Kenna Guardipee, in addition to Devin Smith and a teenage boy who in the courtroom was referred to as AS. The family lived below the suspect and his family in a duplex at 515 W Brown Ave in Kellogg. Police arrived at the house after reports of a shooting at around 7.20pm on Sunday. Police found the family killed by gunfire in the home. More follows...

A group of Florida students and the authors of an award-winning children’s picture book about the true story of a penguin family with two fathers have argued that a Florida school district unconstitutionally restricted access to the book under what opponents have called the state’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. A lawsuit filed in federal court on 20 June argues that the Lake County school district’s decision to pull And Tango Makes Three “cited no legitimate pedagogical reason for its decision” and was restricted only for “illegitimate, narrowly partisan and political reasons.” Last year, Lake County officials announced that the title was “administratively removed due to content regarding sexual orientation/gender identification” prohibited under the “Parental Rights in Education Act,” what critics have called the “Don’t Say Gay” law. That measure, signed into law by Governor Ron DeSantis last year, broadly prohibits “classroom instruction” on issues related to “sexual orientation or gender identity” in kindergarten through third grade” or “in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards” in other grades. Mr DeSantis signed a measure this year that explicitly expands the law to cover all school grades. Opponents have warned its broad scope could effectively block discussion of LGBT+ people, history and events from state schools, and be weaponised against students, staff and their families under threat from potential lawsuits against school districts over perceived violations. The lawsuit from the book’s authors Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell and the families of several young students argues that such restrictions violate First Amendment protections, including the authors’ right to freedom of expression and students’ rights to receive information. And Tango Makes Three “tells a true and heartwarming story, and it teaches students about animal behavior, adoption, diversity among family structures, and responsible family values,” the lawsuit states. “The authors wrote Tango to spread a message of tolerance and equal treatment. They have a sincere and strongly held desire to ensure that Tango is available to children learning about animal behavior, adoption, and family structures, whether similar to or different from their own – and the student plaintiffs wish to read Tango to learn about those very subjects,” the plaintiffs wrote. The book was listed among free expression group PEN America’s most-banned picture books of the last school year. Last year, a record high of more than 1,200 attempts to remove books from schools and libraries were reported to the American Library Association. There were at least 1,477 attempts to ban 874 individual book titles within the first half of the 2022-2023 school year, according to PEN America. The figures mark a nearly 30 per cent spike from book challenges over the previous year. Book ban attempts have largely targeted books by and about LGBT+ people, titles written by or involving people of colour, or materials featuring honest discussions of race and racism, according to PEN America. Mr DeSantis and his administration have repeatedly rejected characterising such restrictions as “book bans” and have accused media outlets of manufacturing a “hoax” and a “fake narrative” surrounding them. The state has been at the centre of book challenges and legal battles over school and library materials as the DeSantis administration implements a sweeping agenda targeting public education and lessons and speech he deems objectionable. PEN American and Penguin Random House, one of the largest book publishers in the world, and several prominent authors and families have also sued a separate school district and school board in Florida’s Escambia County. A lawsuit filed in US District Court last month argues that school officials have pursued an “ideologically driven campaign to push certain ideas out of schools” against the recommendation of experts. “This disregard for professional guidance underscores that the agendas underlying the removals are ideological and political, not pedagogical,” the lawsuit states. The Independent has requested comment from the state’s Department of Education. Read More A zoo, Black History event and university funding: Ron DeSantis under fire after vetoing local funding because lawmakers didn’t endorse him DeSantis wants to model America after Florida. Civil rights groups are sounding the alarm on his ‘hostile’ agenda The school librarian in the middle of Louisiana’s war on libraries ‘They were trying to erase us’: Inside a Texas town’s chilling effort to ban LGBT+ books Biden condemns ‘hysterical’ threats to LGBT+ Americans as White House pushes back on book bans Florida mom who tried to ban Amanda Gorman’s book has ties to far-right groups

Chris Christie unleashed an epic Twitter takedown of Donald Trump’s White House hiring practices after the former president bragged about bringing on “the best” staff. “It’s plain and simple: Either Donald Trump doesn’t know how to pick personnel, or he’s the worst manager in the history of the American presidency,” Mr Christie, who is vying for the Republican presidential nomination against Trump, tweeted on Monday. The former New Jersey governor followed that tweet with nine more, comparing what Mr Trump said about White House appointees before he hired them and after his eventual falling out with them. In the tweets, Mr Christie noted that Mr Trump called Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley a “great patriot” and a “great soldier” before calling him a “f***ing idiot” and that he called former Secretary of Defense James Mattis “the closest thing to General George Patton that we have” before he called him “the world’s most overrated general.” There are plenty more examples. Former Attorney General Bill Barr was Mr Trump’s “first choice from day one” before he was “gutless” and a “coward.” Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had a “deep understanding of geopolitics” before Mr Trump called him “dumb as a rock.” Former Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney was doing an “outstanding job” before Mr Trump called him a “born loser.” It’s a record that undercuts Mr Trump’s frequent boast that he hires the “best people.” A number of the people he hired for his administration are not supporting his second run for president, in some cases criticising his judgment in personal terms. Two members of his administration, former vice president Mike Pence and former secretary to the United Nations Nikki Haley, are running against Mr Trump. “Republicans should listen to what he says,” Mr Christie said in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper on Monday. “He’s a petulant child when someone disagrees with him.” Mr Christie, who is polling in the low single digits and has not held elected office since leaving the governor’s mansion in New Jersey more than five years ago, has distinguished himself apart in the crowded Republican primary as the only candidate willing to repeatedly and harshly criticise Mr Trump. The irony, of course, is that Mr Christie cozied up to Mr Trump after Mr Trump’s triumph in the 2016 presidential nominating contest. Mr Christie served as an adviser to Mr Trump throughout the 2016 general election campaign and led his presidential transition team. He remained a close ally of Mr Trump’s throughout his presidency, turning on him only after the Capitol riot of January 6. Mr Christie announced his second bid for the presidency earlier this month. He last won an election in 2013, four years before he left office in New Jersey with one of the lowest approval ratings ever recorded for a governor. Read More Trump news – live: Judge sets Mar-a-Lago classified papers trial date as Hunter Biden reaches plea deal Trump faces questions about whether he'll drag down the Republican Party after his indictments Chris Christie slams GOP debate pledge as a ‘useless idea’ and rips ‘loser’ Trump Miami's Francis Suarez looks to become first sitting mayor to be president

Memorable racing titles are built on four pillars: a satisfying sense of speed; graphics that

Breaking down the five best non-Wemby prospects in this year's NBA Draft.

James Cameron isn't just one of Hollywood's most successful directors ever, he's also a lover of deep sea exploration.

More people are playing Fortnite in June 2023 than they have in the last six months. Fortnite Chapter 4 Season 3 has brought more than 8 million new players to the Battle Royale.

The Fortnite x Nike Airphoria event allows players to explore a new sneakerhead-inspired creative island to earn free rewards from the Fortnite x Nike collaboration.

The owner, captain, and crew of the fishing vessel Sensation, who lost out on over $3 million in tournament prize money when the 619.4-pound blue marlin they caught on Saturday was disqualified, has hired a law firm to protest the decision.

A constitutional amendment to restore abortion rights in Missouri will move forward after a judge on Tuesday broke a standoff between two Republican officials that had halted the process. Cole County Presiding Judge Jon Beetem ordered Attorney General Andrew Bailey to approve fellow Republican Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick's estimated $51,000 price tag on the proposal within 24 hours. Bailey had refused to approve the price estimate, arguing that if the proposal were to succeed, it could cost the state as much as a million times more than that figure because of lost Medicaid funding or lost revenue that wouldn’t be collected from people who otherwise would be born. But Beetem said Bailey has “no authority to substitute his own judgment for that of the Auditor.” “There is an absolute absence of authority to conclude the Attorney General is permitted to send the Auditor’s fiscal note summary back to revision simply because he disagrees with the Auditor’s estimated cost or savings of a proposed measure,” Beetem wrote in his ruling. A spokesperson said the attorney general's office will appeal. If approved by voters, the proposal would enshrine in the constitution the individual right to make decisions about abortion, childbirth and birth control. Missouri's Republican-led Legislature and Republican governor banned nearly all abortions after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer. The state now allows exceptions for medical emergencies, but not for cases of rape or incest. In Missouri, the auditor is required to calculate how much taxpayer money it could cost to implement ballot measures. The attorney general then reviews and approves the cost estimate in an administrative step that historically has been uneventful. Fitzpatrick’s office in March found that the proposal would have no known impact on state funds and an estimated cost of at least $51,000 annually in reduced local tax revenues, although “opponents estimate a potentially significant loss to state revenue.” Bailey said that cost estimate was so low it would bias voters and told Fitzpatrick to change it. Fitzpatrick refused, arguing that a multibillion-dollar projection for the initiative petition would be inaccurate, despite Fitzpatrick’s personal opposition to abortion. “As much as I would prefer to be able to say this IP would result in a loss to the state of Missouri of $12.5 billion in federal funds, it wouldn’t,” Fitzpatrick wrote in an April 21 letter to Bailey. “To submit a fiscal note summary that I know contains inaccurate information would violate my duty as State Auditor to produce an accurate fiscal note summary.” The standoff had blocked the secretary of state from allowing the pro-abortion rights campaign to start collecting signatures from voters. The campaign would need to collect signatures from 8% of legal voters in six of the state’s eight congressional districts in order to get the proposal on the 2024 ballot. ___ For more AP coverage of the abortion issue: https://apnews.com/hub/abortion Read More Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Watch: Andrew Bailey questioned on BoE independence by House of Lords committee Missouri governor signs ban on transgender health care, school sports Hunter Biden reaches deal with DOJ to plead guilty to federal charges