This couldn't be happening to a more deserving son-of-a-bit . . . I mean person.
From The Orlando Sentinel (by way of Yahoo News):
Gov. Ron DeSantis had a difficult weekend on the culture war front, re-doubling his defense of the state’s controversial new Black history standards as a new report revealed a now-infamous anti-LGBTQ ad was actually made within the campaign itself. A pro-DeSantis account also tweeted a video that included alleged imagery of a Nazi symbol. Though reports that it had been retweeted by a DeSantis campaign staffer before it was deleted were unconfirmed, Florida Democrats pounced. DeSantis’ continuing cultural battles come amid reports that his presidential bid is planning a “reboot” following worsening poll numbers and a major shedding of cash.
. . . “What’s happened is what might be expected, and I did expect,” said Mac Stipanovich, a former Tallahassee Republican consultant who has been a frequent critic of DeSantis. “The campaign is proving to be a clown car. Malevolent clowns, but clowns just the same.”
And this is just a small portion of a wonderful article chock full of DeSantis campaign missteps, blatant lies, and pitiful evasions, all of which gives us a front row seat of what happens when an empty suit decides to run for president without any integrity or substance to back up his verbal bravado. The DeSantis campaign is so bad, one has to wonder if it is a victim of deliberate internal sabotage.
DeSantis is also facing negative press in other areas which are not included in the article, such as his threat to sue Bud Light over its partnership with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney and a leaked transcript from a canceled Showtime documentary about his time as a junior Navy officer at the Guantánamo prison camp. The transcript alleges that he was present at force feedings and tortures of prisoners.
I know how some folks feel about trans women and girls (strangely the concern hardly ever touches trans men and boys) competing in sports, but here is something to consider. In spite of all of the preconceived notions fueling opposition to trans female athletes, maybe there is simply no concrete evidence that trans females have an unfair advantage over cis female athletes.
From Metro Weekly:
A federal judge has blocked Arizona from enforcing a law prohibiting transgender athletes from competing in female-designated sports. U.S. District Judge Jennifer Zipps, of the District of Arizona, granted a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing the Save Women’s Sports Act. The law prohibits transgender female athletes from competing in sports matching their gender identity and allows cisgender students to sue for damages if they believe they have lost out on an athletic opportunity after being forced to compete against a transgender athlete.The ban on transgender athletes was challenged by a 15-year-old volleyball player, referred to as Megan Roe, and an 11-year-old, referred to as Jane Doe, who wishes to play girls’ soccer, basketball and cross-country. Because neither has yet undergone male puberty, and both are on puberty blockers, they argue they don’t have a physical or physiological advantage and should be allowed to compete on teams matching their gender identity.In her order granting the injunction, Zipps found that the law is “overly broad” because it bans transgender female athletes, including those at the elementary school level, from girls’ sports teams, despite the lack of evidence proving that pre-pubertal athletes hold some physiological or unfair competitive advantage over other children based solely on their assigned sex at birth. She also noted that the ban treats transgender boys and transgender girls differently, noting that transgender boys — whom the state and proponents of the ban refer to as “biological girls” — are permitted to play on male-designated teams, despite the alleged physical risks that they would presumably face by competing against “biological male” athletes.Zipps also noted that, under the law, even cisgender female athletes can be investigated and forced to submit to genetic testing to “prove” their biological sex.
Florida Gov Ron DeSantis obviously didn't get the message that his law banning drag performances was a bad idea when a judge issued a preliminary injunction against it last month. So, like a hardheaded child, his administration tried to sidestep a "no."
And got knocked back.
From The Associated Press:
Librarians who feared fines for hosting drag queen story hours and Pride parade organizers who worried about citations for including drag performers can breathe easier now that a judge has ruled that his injunction blocking Florida’s anti-drag law extends to all Florida venues, an attorney who is helping challenge the law said Thursday.
A pair of orders that U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell issued in the past month makes clear that drag performances in themselves are not lewd or lascivious behavior, said Gary Israel, one of the attorneys for an Orlando restaurant that filed a lawsuit challenging the new Florida law championed by Gov. Ron DeSantis as unconstitutional.
“The state has a very weak hand in this litigation,” Israel said.
In his first order last month, the Orlando judge granted a preliminary injunction temporarily halting enforcement of the law until a trial is held to determine its constitutionality. He also denied a Florida licensing and regulatory agency’s request to dismiss the lawsuit. The agency appealed the decision and asked that during the appeal the injunction only be applied to the restaurant that brought the lawsuit.
Presnell rejected that argument on Wednesday, saying any harm to the state of Florida is minimal if the preliminary injunction remains in place, and that all Floridians are potentially parties since free speech is at stake. He reiterated that the law is likely unconstitutional. “Protecting the right to freedom of speech is the epitome of acting in the public interest,” Presnell wrote. “It is no accident that this freedom is enshrined in the First Amendment.”
. . . The new law punished venues for allowing children into “adult live performances.” Though it did not specify drag shows, the sponsor of the legislation said it was aimed at those performances. Venues that violated the law faced fines and the possibility of their liquor licenses being suspended or revoked. Individuals could be charged with a misdemeanor crime.
. . . The lawsuit challenging the new law was brought by the owner of a Hamburger Mary’s restaurant and bar in Orlando, which regularly hosts drag shows, including family-friendly performances on Sundays that children were invited to attend. The restaurant owner said the law was overbroad, was written vaguely and violated First Amendment rights by chilling speech.
