SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
District Court Issues Injunction Against Guidance Protecting Transgender Students
“We will continue to file lawsuits representing transgender students and litigate them to the fullest extent of the law...”
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
A U.S. District Court judge today issued a preliminary injunction against the federal government's guidance to public school districts regarding their legal responsibility to allow transgender students to use the same restrooms as other students. The ruling came in the multi-state lawsuit, Texas v. United States.
Five civil rights organizations who had submitted a joint amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief in the lawsuit - Lambda Legal, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and ACLU of Texas; National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR); Transgender Law Center; and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) - issued the following statement in response to U.S. District Court Judge Reed O'Connor's ruling:
"A ruling by a single judge in one circuit cannot and does not undo the years of clear legal precedent nationwide establishing that transgender students have the right to go to school without being singled out for discrimination. This unfortunate and premature ruling may, however, confuse school districts that are simply trying to support their students, including their transgender students. So let us make it clear to those districts: your obligations under the law have not changed, and you are still not only allowed but required to treat transgender students fairly. The scope of this injunction has no effect on the ability of other courts or lawyers representing transgender people to continue to rely on the federal government's interpretations of Title IX or on prior decisions that have reached similar conclusions about the scope of federal sex discrimination laws.
"The court's misguided decision targets a small, vulnerable group of young people - transgender elementary and high school students - for potential continued harassment, stigma and abuse."
Although the court failed to consider the interests of the very students the federal laws were intended to protect, the five civil rights organizations who advocated on their behalf avowed, "We will continue to file lawsuits representing transgender students and litigate them to the fullest extent of the law--regardless of what happens with this particular federal guidance."
Texas v. United States was brought by Texas and 10 other states -- subsequently joined by two additional states -- against the United States, the Departments of Justice, Education and Labor and numerous federal officials. The plaintiffs include the states of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky (through its governor), Louisiana, Mississippi (through its governor), Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, and the Arizona Department of Education, the Heber-Overgaard Unified School District in Arizona, Harrold Independent School District in Texas, and Maine Governor Paul LePage. Several of these plaintiffs lie in the Fourth, Sixth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits, which had issued binding appellate decisions consistent with the guidance of the federal agencies.
The lawsuit targets various federal letters, guides, memos, and statements regarding Title IX of the Education Amendments that conclude that federal bans on sex discrimination encompass gender identity discrimination, and that transgender individuals should be allowed to use restrooms consistent with their gender identity. The lawsuit claims that that guidance is in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution. A copycat lawsuit was filed recently by the state of Nebraska, joined by Arkansas, Kansas, Michigan (through its attorney general), Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming.
The court's order can be read here.
The joint amicus brief filed by the five civil rights organizations can be read here.
This press release can be found here: https://www.aclu.org/news/district-court-issues-injunction-against-guidance-protecting-transgender-students
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
'A Pathetic Power Grab': Trump Purges Bipartisan Election Assistance Commission
"This move undermines the integrity of nonpartisan election administration," said Arizona's secretary of state.
Jul 10, 2026
US President Donald Trump late Thursday forced out the remaining three members of an independent, bipartisan commission that assists state election officials across the country, a move that critics condemned as a "pathetic power grab" ahead of the 2026 midterms.
The two Democratic members of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), Benjamin Hovland and Thomas Hicks, were fired, and Republican Commissioner Christy McCormick resigned at the White House's request, according to ProPublica. The agency, established by Congress more than two decades ago, now lacks leadership and any ability to make decisions, just months before the 2026 elections.
The EAC, as its website states, is "an independent, bipartisan commission whose mission is to help election officials improve the administration of elections and help Americans participate in the voting process." In an executive order last year, Trump ordered the EAC to implement proof-of-citizenship requirements in the federal voter registration process, along with other changes. The president's effort to impose his policy demands on the EAC was mostly blocked in federal court.
Trump, who has said he wants his administration to "take over" voting nationwide ahead of the 2026 midterms, has since taken other steps that watchdogs and Democratic lawmakers say amount to an attempt to preemptively subvert the coming elections, including a sweeping assault on mail-in voting—which is also facing legal challenges. Legislatively, Trump is pushing Republicans to pass the SAVE America Act, a bill that experts say would prevent millions of Americans from voting.
Michael Waldman, president and CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice, said Thursday's EAC firings "are deeply concerning in light of President Trump’s relentless efforts to try to interfere in elections."
"These removals leave the agency without leadership and unable to carry out its major responsibilities," said Waldman. "The guardrails Congress placed on this agency are clear and must be followed: The Election Assistance Commission was designed to be bipartisan with four members, no more than two of which can be from the same political party. The agency cannot make any significant decisions or take any significant actions unless three confirmed commissioners agree. Until bipartisan replacements are confirmed, the agency cannot lawfully make any decisions that affect how Americans vote."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, said Trump's termination of EAC commissioners underscores that "he’s scared of the voting power of the American people."
"This move is another pathetic attempt to sow doubt in our elections, which are safely and expertly run by states and localities," said Gilbert. "This agency deserves a steady hand and expert leadership. That said, it is important for voters to know that states and localities, not the EAC, run our elections. Even more importantly, it is the voters who decide who takes office."
The EAC firings came less than two weeks after the conservative-dominated US Supreme Court handed Trump the power to purge independent agencies at will with its Trump v. Slaughter ruling, erasing around 90 years of precedent.
Election law expert Rick Hasen warned in a blog post on Thursday that Trump "could try to direct the commissioner-less EAC to do his bidding, for example by stating that the EAC must amend the federal voter registration form that states must accept for federal elections to include documentary proof of citizenship."
"Trump’s first voting-related EO tried to do this, and he was stymied. But that was acting through the commissioners and before the Slaughter case," Hasen noted. "If he tries anything like this, it will be high-profile and very important litigation that will end up at the Supreme Court on the emergency docket over the summer."
Adrian Fontes, Arizona’s Democratic secretary of state, said in a statement late Thursday that the EAC purge was "irresponsible and dangerous," accusing the administration of remaining "dead set on causing chaos for our election officials across this country."
"This move undermines the integrity of nonpartisan election administration," Fontes added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Abolish ICE,' Says Mamdani After Agent Kills Houston Man Lorenzo Salgado Araujo
Salgado "called Houston home for 35 years," said New York's democratic socialist mayor. "On Tuesday, an ICE agent shot and killed him."
Jul 09, 2026
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Thursday renewed his call to "abolish ICE" after a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent fatally shot a man in Texas earlier this week.
"Lorenzo Salgado Araujo called Houston home for 35 years. On Tuesday, an ICE agent shot and killed him," Mamdani said on social media. "His family learned of his death from a video before anyone bothered to knock on their door."
"New York City stands with the Salgado family in demanding a full, independent investigation and real accountability," the mayor added. "To the Salgado family and any immigrant family in this city living in fear: We grieve with you, and we will continue to stand beside you in the pursuit of justice."
More than 1,000 people gathered in Houston's East End on Wednesday evening to denounce ICE and remember Salgado, a 52-year-old married father of three originally from Mexico who, according to relatives, was in the process of legalizing his status in the United States.
Salgado's son, school teacher Ronaldo Salgado, said that his father had "dedicated his life to giving his family the American dream."
Salgado was driving in the Magnolia Park neighborhood to pick up his construction crew on Tuesday morning when an unidentified ICE agent fatally shot him during an enforcement operation. ICE claimed that Salgado tried to evade arrest and threatened agents with his vehicle, but his family, civil rights advocates, and community leaders strongly dispute that account, pointing to surveillance footage and eyewitness accounts that they argue undermine the agency's narrative.
A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told The New York Times late on Thursday that neither Salgado nor any of his three passengers were the targets of ICE enforcement, but that they drew agents' attention because one of them resembled a wanted man from Guatemala.
Democratic lawmakers and civil rights groups have joined Salgado's relatives in demanding an independent investigation of his killing.
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced Thursday that her government plans to file criminal complaints in the United States in connection with 14 Mexican nationals who died in ICE custody. Sheinbaum added that Salgado's killing "is not only sad and regrettable, but also appears to have been targeted."
On-duty officers from ICE and other Department of Homeland Security agencies have fatally shot at least four other people during President Donald Trump's deadly second-term crackdown on undocumented immigrants: Silverio Villegas González of Mexico and US citizens Ruben Ray Martinez, Renee Good, and Alex Pretti.
At least dozens of people have also died in ICE custody or shortly after being released during Trump's second term. Last month, ICE announced that it was rescinding a 2021 Biden administration policy requiring congressional notification and an investigation whenever a detainee died within 30 days of their release.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Absolutely Unprecedented': Trump Lackeys Crushing Efforts to Rein in Price-Hiking Corporate Mergers
“Consumers are getting really screwed by all of this,” said one critic.
Jul 09, 2026
Political appointees installed by President Donald Trump are overruling career attorneys inside the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division, intervening to weaken or halt investigations into major corporate mergers in a way never seen before, MS NOW reported Thursday.
Three unnamed sources told the outlet "that DOJ staff have privately complained that the Trump administration is essentially deciding not to enforce antitrust laws that are critical to keeping companies from becoming single-source providers and being able to charge enormous sums for their product or service."
According to MS NOW:
The two mergers that DOJ leaders are ramming through include two low-cost Mexican air carriers, Viva Aerobus and Volaris, who announced their plans to merge last year, and the proposed merger of the Italian firm Saipem and UK firm Subsea7, who together control a sizable portion of sales for equipment used for subsea oil operations. Major oil companies, including ExxonMobil, Petrobras and TotalEnergies, have filed formal objections with federal regulators about the latter merger, arguing to antitrust regulators that the combined firms will create a subsea monopoly that will increase costs, delay critical projects and force clients into expensive, long-term contracts.
Experts say the aforementioned mergers are likely to drive up prices US consumers pay for airfare to Mexico and at the gas pump, yet again giving the lie to Trump's "America First" pledge.
Current and former DOJ officials described Trump's interference as without precedent.
“It’s unilateral surrender on antitrust enforcement; it’s absolutely unprecedented,” Bill Baer, the former assistant attorney general for the antitrust division during the Obama administration. “It’s definitely going to hurt consumers. It means prices will go up, concentration is going to increase—and quality often diminishes when you have only a few firms operating in the same market.”
The DOJ Antitrust Division was originally launched more than a century ago during the tail-end of the Progressive Era to combat monopolies and enforce antitrust legislation like the Clayton Antitrust Act and the Gilded Age-era Sherman Act. It was formally created during the Great Depression following weak enforcement of the Sherman and Clayton acts, as the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration viewed concentrated corporate power as a threat not only to consumers but to democracy itself.
While the postwar decades saw relatively aggressive antitrust enforcement by presidents of both major parties, the Reagan administration adopted a much more permissive merger philosophy that laid the groundwork for decades of consolidation across industries that has continued to this day, despite limited antitrust revivals during the Obama and Biden administrations.
Biden-era Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan and DOJ officials pursued a more aggressive antitrust agenda that Trump has been rolling back in favor of deregulation. Critics have pointed out that Trump has sometimes used antitrust mechanisms selectively, targeting certain media or technology companies for political reasons rather than consistently applying a broad anti-monopoly approach.
According to an article published last month in The Wall Street Journal, Stanley Woodward, the senior DOJ official now overseeing antitrust enforcement, has told department lawyers that he favors resolving cases through settlements rather than taking corporations to trial. Some antitrust attorneys interpreted the remarks as a directive to avoid litigation and seek settlements in ongoing and future cases. Critics say Woodward’s posture could weaken the DOJ's ability to challenge monopolistic mergers in favor of fast-tracked settlements.
"He's taking litigation off the table, and you don’t get a settlement absent a litigation threat,” one person with knowledge of Woodward's actions told MS NOW. “I can’t think of an administration in history that would want to run antitrust policy like this.”
“Consumers are getting really screwed by all of this,” the person continued. “We’re talking 10 years of consumer harm that can’t be undone.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular