Tuesday, February 11, 2025
spot_imgspot_img
Tuesday, February 11, 2025

Milwaukee Press Club 'Excellence in Wisconsin Journalism' 2020 & 2021 Award Winners

12 Ways a Liberal Supreme Court Would Destroy Wisconsin

spot_img

What’s at stake? Everything.

A contested and extremely important state Supreme Court race is underway. Two conservatives (Jennifer Dorow and Dan Kelly) are facing two liberals (Janet Protasiewicz and Everett Mitchell) in the Feb. 21 primary. The top two vote-getters will advance to the April general election.

We can’t underscore enough how important this race is.

If either liberal wins, the left will seize outright control of the state Supreme Court. The consequences would be immense. Power has already been hanging in the balance of a single vote. As of June 2022, the Wisconsin Court had issued more 4-3 decisions “than at any time in the last 70 years.” according to WPR. If a liberal is elected in April, expect a lot of 5-2 decisions or 4-3 in the direction of the left.

A new liberal-controlled court would likely undo everything from Gov. Scott Walker’s signature reforms to the 1849 abortion law. A new liberal court would shift power to the governor and redraw the Legislature to Democrats’ favor. Gun rights, school choice, voter ID – it’s all on the line.

We have compiled the 12 top ways a liberal Supreme Court would destroy Wisconsin:


1. Legislative Maps

The leading liberal candidate for the court, Janet Protasiewicz, outright declared the legislative maps “rigged,” despite ethics codes barring judges from prejudging cases.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court (the liberals + sometimes conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn) initially approved Gov. Tony Evers’ legislative and congressional maps. The Evers’ maps were challenged at the U.S. Supreme Court. SCOTUS approved Evers’ Congressional map but remanded the legislative maps back to the Wisconsin Supreme Court because they failed a couple of key tests.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court had basically three options: fix the Evers’ maps to address the SCOTUS concerns; draw their own maps; or approve the GOP maps. They chose to approve the GOP maps in a 4-3 decision, with Hagedorn flipping to the conservative side.

A new liberal-controlled court would likely choose to draw its own maps, giving Democrats an advantage in the state Legislature, hoping to undo the Republican majorities. Those Republican majorities are the only thing stopping Evers’ agenda from running through Wisconsin like a freight train.


2. Abortion

Protasiewicz has been clear that she is pro-abortion and opposes the overturning of Roe V. Wade. A new liberal court would almost certainly strike down the state’s 1849 law banning abortion. In fact, Protasiewicz’s first TV ads focused on abortion.

“I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion. It’s time for a change,” she says in one.

Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul has already filed a suit to invalidate the 1849 law. Kaul is arguing the 1849 law is unenforceable because lawmakers passed other changes to abortion laws since then. They did so because Roe vs. Wade was in place then.

For example, Republican lawmakers banned abortions after five months of pregnancy. If the 1849 law is invalidated by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Republicans almost certainly could not revise the law further because Evers would veto any changes.

Other than maps, abortion is the left’s top target.


3. Act 10

In 2011, Wisconsin passed Act 10, which limited the rights of public employee unions to demand collective bargaining. Act 10 did not restrict the rights of unions to represent their members. Public sector unions may not include health insurance costs, or larger benefit packages in their contracts. Act 10 limits salary raises to the consumer price index.

Last year, the MacIver Institute reported that Act 10 resulted in savings to school district budgets of $15 billion.

According to the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, Act 10 has allowed flexibility in the employment process for teachers. Now, good teachers can be rewarded with merit pay while bad teachers can be more easily removed.

Protasiewicz has already called Act 10 “unconstitutional,” telegraphing that a liberal court could seek to invalidate it. And you can bet that unions would bring a new case.


4. Election Integrity

Expect a liberal court to be extremely hostile to any efforts to tighten up election integrity.

In July, the Wisconsin Supreme Court, with Hagedorn joining the conservatives, ruled that “most ballot drop boxes aren’t allowed in the state and that a voter can’t have someone else return — in person — their completed absentee ballot on their behalf.”

Expect a liberal court to go in the other direction if it gets a new challenge, and it will.

“Zuckerbucks” and other election integrity issues could also end up before the court.


5. Concealed Carry

In 2011, Wisconsin passed Act 35 which allowed licensed people to carry concealed weapons in public. The law also allows for a person to carry, without a license, a concealed weapon in their home or place of business.

A liberal court would likely be hostile to the state’s concealed carry law. In 2022, the Wisconsin Supreme Court broadened the concealed carry law, saying that it people with disorderly conduct convictions couldn’t be invalidated from carrying concealed weapons.


6. Castle Doctrine

In 2011, Wisconsin enacted 2011 Wisconsin Act 94, known as the castle doctrine law.

According to the State Bar of Wisconsin, “the law affords a presumption of immunity in civil and criminal actions to individuals who use deadly force in self-defense against persons unlawfully or forcibly entering their home, motor vehicle, or place of business. It also prohibits consideration of whether the actor had an opportunity to flee or retreat before he or she used force.”

Expect the left to target this law.


7. Safer at Home Law

We doubt that lockdowns will ever be a realistic possibility again. The COVID-19 panic has waned. However, if such a situation ever presented itself, you can rest assured that a new liberal court would have kept the state locked down.

According to Wisconsin Public Radio, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that the “Evers’ administration exceeded its authority when state Department of Health Services Secretary Andrea Palm issued the ‘Safer at Home.'”

“This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, and her order to all people within Wisconsin to remain in their homes, not to travel, and to close all businesses that she declares are not ‘essential’ in Emergency Order 28,” conservative Chief Justice Patience Roggensack wrote for the majority.

A liberal court would likely have upheld these powers.


8. Right to Work

In 2015, Wisconsin passed 2015 Wisconsin Act 1 which created a “right-to-work” law for private sector employers and employees. Wisconsin “became the 25th state in the country to enact a ‘Right to Work’ law,” according to Quarles.com. “That law prohibits collective bargaining agreements from requiring an employee, as a condition of employment, to become or remain a union member or to pay any union dues, fees, assessments, charges, or other expenses to a union.”

It has had a lasting impact allowing employees to make their own union membership decisions across Wisconsin.

Multiple unions sued, arguing that “right-to-work” was “illegal taking of property without just compensation, prohibited under the Wisconsin constitution.”

A new liberal court would likely favor the unions if a new challenge was brought forward.


9. School Choice

Educational freedom, school choice, and parental rights will be at stake if the left seizes control of the state Supreme Court.

A Wisconsin Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of vouchers dates to 2003. The Wisconsin Institute on Law and Liberty explains, “The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the parent’s choice for the voucher, even if it is a religious private school, does not violate the Establishment Clause of the Wisconsin Constitution because the parent (not the government) is directing the dollars.”

Expect a liberal-controlled court to be hostile to educational freedom and school choice issues.

Expect a new liberal court to also neuter parents’ rights when it comes to school district gender policies. WILL sued to bar a Madison school district policy “that allows students to self-identify their names and pronouns without parental permission.” The state Supreme Court, with Hagedorn joining the liberals, had declined to rule on the underlying issue.

Another example: In 2019, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty wrote, “In Koschkee v. Taylor, we win again before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, establishing that educational policy in the state of Wisconsin is made by the legislature and not by the state Superintendent of Public Instruction.” A new liberal court would likely shift powers back to DPI in cases brought before it.


10. Voter ID

As NPR put it, “Wisconsin’s ID law has been the subject of litigation ever since it was passed by the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature in 2011.”

Liberals challenged its constitutionality. In 2014, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the state’s photo ID law for voting. “Writing for the majorities in Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker and League of Women Voters v. Walker, Justice Patience Roggensack ruled that Wisconsin’s Voter ID law was constitutional,” the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty wrote.

A liberal court would probably strike the law down.


11. Restrict Police Powers

Expect a liberal-controlled court to restrict the powers of police at the detriment of public safety and police investigations. Expect them to expand the rights of criminal defendants.

These changes could come in the areas of search and seizure, lineups, interrogations, and more. For example,  the court previously “held that a traffic stop may be based on a law enforcement official’s objectively reasonable mistake of law.” These kinds of cases would swing against cops.

In other cases, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “a divided Wisconsin Supreme Court…threw out one conviction but upheld another in cases in which drivers challenged whether police officers’ really had probable cause for detaining them or were acting solely on hunches and bias over past drug use.”

In 2005, the state Supreme Court, in cases involving criminal defendants’ rights, started embracing a concept known as “new federalism.” This “refers to a tendency to look first to the state constitution and assign greater rights than the Supreme Court to parallel provisions in the federal constitution,” Wisconsin Appeals.net explained. Expect a comeback of that concept to grant criminal defendants more rights in Wisconsin than the U.S. Constitution requires.


12. The Governor’s Power

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty recently prevailed on a case limiting Evers’ veto authority. “We prevail in the state Supreme Court in Bartlett v. Evers, overturning certain of Governor Evers’ vetoes, ending the abusive veto that allowed governors to rewrite laws passed as part of the budget,” they wrote.

Expect a liberal court to expand Evers’ power.

Trump to Stop U.S. Production of Pennies

President Donald Trump said late Sunday that he has ordered the U.S. Treasury Department to stop producing pennies.

Pennies famously cost more than a penny to produce, putting them in the crosshairs of Trump and DOGE’s government efficiency push.

"For far too long the United States has minted pennies which literally cost us more than 2 cents," Trump wrote on TruthSocial, his social media site. "This is so wasteful! I have instructed my Secretary of the US Treasury to stop producing new pennies.

Let's rip the waste out of our great nations budget, even if it's a penny at a time," Trump added.

DOGE posted on X last month critical of the penny’s cost, hinting at its fate.

"The penny costs over 3 cents to make and cost US taxpayers over $179 million in FY2023," DOGE wrote on X. "The Mint produced over 4.5 billion pennies in FY2023, around 40% of the 11.4 billion coins for circulation produced. Penny (or 3 cents!) for your thoughts."

According to the U.S. Mint’s latest report, the cost of all coins is on the rise. From the Mint’s 2024 report:

"FY 2024 unit costs increased for all circulating denominations compared to last year. The penny’s unit cost increased 20.2 percent, the nickel’s unit cost increased by 19.4 percent, the dime’s unit cost increased by 8.7 percent, and the quarter-dollar’s unit cost increased by 26.2 percent. The unit cost for pennies (3.69 cents) and nickels (13.78 cents) remained above face value for the 19th consecutive fiscal year."

Lake Sturgeon Protection

Wisconsin Lawmakers Want State Exempt From Any Lake Sturgeon Protection

(The Center Square) – A group of Wisconsin lawmakers have filed legislation to protect sturgeon spearing in the state.

The bill would exempt Wisconsin from any listing of lake sturgeon under the federal Endangered Species Act.

The group, including Republican Congressmen Glenn Grothman and Mike Gallagher filed what they called the Sturgeon Protected and Exempt from Absurd Regulations Act.

Reps. Tony Wied, Grothman and Tom Tiffany introduced the legislation on Friday.

The bill is in response to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducting a status assessment of lake sturgeon after the group was sued by an animal rights group in 2018 attempting to have lake sturgeon listed as threatened.

“Sturgeon-spearing is crucial to maintaining Wisconsin’s lake sturgeon population which is why we must take proactive steps to ensure that we are exempt from any action to list the lake sturgeon under the Endangered Species Act,” Tiffany said about the bill. “Wisconsin is a global leader in sturgeon management, and the SPEAR Act will protect this unique and long-standing tradition for years to come.”

https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/BILLS-118hr7037ih

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said it will not add the lake sturgeon to the endangered species list last year.

A bipartisan group of Wisconsin lawmakers sent a letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in December 2023 pointing out the impact a listing could have on Wisconsin and how the state has worked to manage the lake sturgeon population.

The letter was signed by Gallagher and Grothman along with Sens. Ron Johnson and Tammy Baldwin and U.S. Reps. Bryan Steil, Tiffany, Scott Fitzgerald and Derrick Van Orden.

“Wisconsin does not list lake sturgeon endangered nor threatened in state waters, and has in place a sturgeon program considered a world model for effective management and recovery, and as such should be exempt from any Federal ESA listing of the species”, said Dr. Ron Bruch, former Chief of Fisheries and Leader of the statewide Sturgeon Management Team for the WI Department of Natural Resources.

dpi wisconsin

Wisconsin Republicans Call for Transparency, Fairness in School Referendums

(The Center Square) – A pair of Wisconsin legislators are pushing for more transparency in the school referendum process in the state.

The proposal comes after 169 out of 241 school ballot referenda in 2024 elections were approved by voters at a cost of $4.4 billion to taxpayers.

Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara, R-Appleton, and Rep. Scott Allen, R-Waukesha, proposed bills that would require local governments and school boards to include information on the ballot about how much the difference in taxes would for a median-valued home in the community resulting from the referendum.

“Referendums are opportunities for voters to make important decisions about how their tax dollars should be spent,” Allen said. “Good decision making requires transparency in the information provided to voters.”

A second bill would protect school districts from losing state funding when other districts go to referendum.

“It was a shock to many to learn that the massive school referendum passed in Milwaukee would take away vital state funding from over 300 other school districts,” Allen said. “It’s only fair that large referendums in one district should not negatively affect other school districts.”

A Legislative Fiscal Bureau report last year analyzed by Badger Institute showed that a $252 million Milwaukee referendum would cost Madison, Waukesha and Racine $2 million a year in state funding while Appleton and West Bend would lose more than $1 million each year.

The impact is due to tax base equalization, which means that “a school district's property tax rate does not depend on the property tax base of the district, but rather on the level of expenditures.”

The bill states that any school referendum of over $50 million dollars should be paid for by the district that votes for the referendum instead of taking away money from shared school funding.

Tammy Baldwin Supports Transgender Children Surgeries

Trump Order Forces Many Medical Providers to End Transgender Procedures on Children

Late last month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order restricting “transgender” procedures on youth, including puberty blockers and surgeries such as mastectomies and penile reconstruction. In response, many medical providers including some of the top in the nation for performing them have announced they will comply with the EO.

The EO states that “it is the policy of the United States that it will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called 'transition' of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit these destructive and life-altering procedures.”

Last year, nonprofit Do No Harm unveiled a database reporting that between 2019-2023, there were 13,000 gender reassignment procedures performed throughout the nation on minors; those procedures included both surgeries and prescriptions. Among the top states in the nation for those procedures was Ohio, which has since enacted legislation banning such procedures.

The Center Square reached out to more than two dozen medical providers throughout the country based on data provided by Do No Harm regarding their total billing, prescriptions, and surgeries performed, asking them how they planned to respond to Trump’s EO.

Among those to announce they were suspending all procedures was Seattle-based UW Medicine, which stated in an email that it was “committed to supporting the clinical care needs and well-being of all our patients, as well as complying with state and federal law. We are currently in compliance and are also continuing to provide our full spectrum of services.”

Seattle Children’s Hospital ranked among the top in the nation for puberty blocker prescriptions; though it did not respond to request for comment, there have been reports that it has suspended those services, and its webpage for gender affirmation surgery has since been removed.

MultiCare Mary Bridge Children's Hospital located in Tacoma wrote in an email that while it does not perform gender-affirming surgeries, “we are aware of the executive order that calls for an end to gender-affirming medical treatments for children and adolescents under 19 and are continuing to monitor the situation. Executive orders are directives to federal agencies on how they will operate. Much of what’s been issued has not yet become rules for us to evaluate.”

D.C.-based Children’s National Hospital released a statement that it will no longer prescribe puberty blockers or hormone therapy, noting that prior to the EO it did not perform gender affirming surgeries.

Coolie Dickinson Hospital based out of Massachusetts wrote in an email that it “is reviewing to see what, if any, actual impact the executive orders might have and would follow up, if there is any impact. In the meantime, the care we provide to our community continues as normal at this time.”

University of Michigan Health stated that its “teams are assessing the potential impact of this executive order on our healthcare services and the communities we serve. Our priority remains delivering high-quality, accessible care to our patients while ensuring compliance with the law."

Another medical provider to cease gender transition services for anyone under 19 is VCU Health and Children’s Hospital of Richmond, Virginia, which wrote in a statement that it was “in response to an Executive Order issued by the White House on January 28, 2025, and related state guidance received by VCU on January 30, 2025. Our doors remain open to all patients and their families for screening, counseling, mental health care and all other health care needs.”

UCSF’s Gender Affirming Care in San Francisco has also ended services for patients under 19, a policy also adopted by Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles.

Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York simply wrote in an email that “we will keep you posted once we have an update on this matter.”

Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago and the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia both said they were reviewing their services.

Several hospitals and hospital systems who performed these procedures on minors did not respond to The Center Square's requests for comment on the executive order. The Center Square will continue to seek clarification on whether they plan to comply with the order.

thomas gogin

Susan Crawford Made Excuses When Sex Offender Walked Free Due to Botched Appeal

Susan Crawford called the massive error in the Thomas Gogin sexual assault case a "simple...

A Minority Party Throwing a Major Tantrum

Since January 20th, it's obvious that the Democrats did not learn a thing from the...
brittany kinser

Brittany Kinser Slams MPS, DPI for ‘Gross Mismanagement’ After Lead Discovery

Brittany Kinser, the centrist candidate for DPI Superintendent, slammed Milwaukee Public Schools and the Jill...
marty schulteis

Washington Co. Sheriff Marty Schulteis Says ICE Has His Full Support; 7 Inmates Have Detainers

"You have the support of the Sheriff’s Office anywhere in Washington County," - Sheriff Marty...

Gov. Evers: Why Are You Siding With Criminal Illegals Who Commit Felonies?

This is an opinion piece by state Rep. Jim Piwowarczyk (R-Hubertus) Today, I introduced new legislation...
mpd

WAR ON MPD: Officers Haven’t Had Pay Raise for 2 Years; Make Less Than Area Forces

Milwaukee Police officers, despite having the toughest law enforcement job in the state, have been...
milwaukee county drug overdose

FENTANYL’S COST: 444 People Died of Drug ODs in Milwaukee County Last Year

President Trump is engaging in a high-stakes tariff war with Canada, Mexico, and China, with...
brad schimel

Former Wisconsin AG Brad Schimel Leads Leftist Susan Crawford in Supreme Court Race: Poll

Former Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel leads leftist Dane County Judge Susan Crawford by 5...

Bill Would Limit Which Flags Can Fly at Wisconsin Government Buildings

(The Center Square) – A new Wisconsin bill would limit government-sponsored divisions from flying certain flags.

The bill prevents flags other than the U.S. flag, Wisconsin flag, local flags and U.S. armed forces and POW/MIA flags from being flown or hung outside any state or local institution.

The bill was introduced by a group of Republicans including Rep. Jerry L. O’Connor, R-Fond du Lac, Dave Murphy, R- Greenville, Rob Brooks, R-Saukville, Joy Goeben, R-Hobart and State Sens. Dan Feyen, R-Fond du Lac, and Cory Tomczyk, R-Mosinee.

The bill points to particular flags that have led to divisiveness including those of political movements or social causes, such as MAGA, pride, heterosexual, CSA, Second Amendment rights, BLM, ALL Lives Matter, Antifa, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice and others.

The bill doesn’t prohibit any private citizens or Native American tribes from flying any flags.

“Government should not be in the business of choosing sides, or even giving the appearance of choosing sides,” said Feyen. “This bill simply ensures that the first impression of all government buildings and institutions is neutral, offering equal treatment to all Wisconsinites.”

The lawmakers said that they were asked to act on the divisiveness by Wisconsin residents.

“Flags on government buildings are not supposed to be divisive and should not support one ideology over another,” said Sen. Tomczyk, “When the governor uses flags flown over the State Capitol and other taxpayer-funded buildings to divide the people of Wisconsin, it is shameful and frankly, embarrassing. It is time to end this nonsense.”

Illegal Border Crossings Buses Carrying Migrants Northern Border Illegal Border Crossers Immigration Parole Illegal Immigrant Convicts Biden’s Immigration Policies

Republican Bill Would Block Illegal Immigrants From Receiving Tax Breaks

Immigrants residing illegally within the U.S. could no longer receive child tax credits or tax breaks for low income earners if the Safeguarding American Workers’ Benefits Act becomes law.

Reintroduced by Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., the legislation would require both parents and children to have Social Security numbers that are valid for employment in order to claim the Child Tax Credit or the Earned Income Tax Credit.

Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., has introduced a companion bill in the House.

The U.S. Joint Committee on Taxation estimates Hyde-Smith's legislation could save nearly $28 billion over ten years.

“I welcome President [Donald] Trump’s intent to target wasteful spending and enforce immigration laws,” Hyde-Smith said Tuesday. “The environment is certainly friendlier now to adopt legislation that saves billions of dollars and ensures that only U.S citizens and persons authorized to work can benefit from the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit.”

While the CTC and EITC should only go to those with SSNs valid for employment, certain loopholes allow some people who do not meet the requirements to receive the federal benefits. The bill would close those loopholes.

Only weeks into Trump’s second presidency, Republicans and the Commander in Chief have already implemented or introduced other anti-illegal immigration measures, including reinstating the Remain in Mexico policy and authorizing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to round up and deport migrants residing in the U.S.

The Safeguarding American Workers’ Benefits Act is also part of Republicans’ federal cost-cutting efforts to finance the extension of Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will cost $4.6 trillion over the next ten years.

“I will work to ensure that [the] Safeguarding American Workers’ Benefits Act is considered as part of the debate to extend and improve on the Trump tax cuts that expire this year,” Hyde-Smith said.

Riley Gaines

Nearly 80% of Americans Don’t Want Men Playing in Women’s Sports

Surveying nearly an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, a poll taken by the New York Times and polling company Ipsos showed that the majority of Americans do not want transgender-identifying men in women’s sports.

Of those surveyed, 79% answered that men “should not” compete in women’s sports when posed with the following question: “thinking about transgender female athletes – meaning athletes who were male at birth but who currently identify as female – do you think they should or should not be allowed to compete in women's sports?”

This number has increased from a 2023 The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll that reported 67% of American voters were collectively against men playing in women’s sports.

When the 2025 New York Times-Ipsos poll is broken up along political divides, 94% of Republicans, 67% of Democrats, and 64% of Independents or “something else” answered that men should not be in women’s sports.

The highest bracket that believes men should be allowed to play in women’s sports are Democrats, equaling 31%.

The results of this poll came just before President Trump declared there are only two sexes in America, male and female. The survey was taken from Jan. 2 to 11.

When reached for comment, Ipsos vice president for public affairs Mallory Newall repeated the question posed to respondents and said “we cannot speculate on what people meant or interpreted beyond the wording of the question.”

Ipsos is a global market research and polling company, according to its description in the poll document.

Men in women’s sports has become an issue in recent years, with high school girls such as Payton McNabb getting injured by a male competitor on a volleyball team and former University of Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines becoming an activist defending women's-only sports after placing second to a transgender female swimming competitor.

The Independent Women’s Forum senior legal advisor Beth Parlato told The Center Square that “without female-only athletics, the safety of girls and women is endangered, and men will dominate the playing field, which unfairly takes away awards, opportunities, scholarships and roster spots.”

The Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) is a nonprofit women’s organization “dedicated to developing and advancing policies” that “enhance people’s freedom, opportunities, and well-being,” according to its website. IWF has taken a staunch stance against men competing in women’s sports.

“Males and females possess unique and immutable biological differences,” Parlato said. “With respect to sports, males have biological athletic advantages over females, as the average male is stronger, bigger and faster.

“Furthermore, allowing males in female-only spaces is an invasion of a women’s right to privacy and threatens women’s safety and well-being,” Parlato said.

“Defining sex-based terms in law and policy is essential to protect women’s sports and spaces,” Parlato said.

Trump’s executive order on two sexes provides “needed clarity to preserve the legal existence of women as distinct from men,” Parlato said. “Protect women’s sports bills at both the federal and state levels must be codified into law to ensure equal athletic opportunities for women and girls."

The NYT-Ipsos survey was “of the American general population” aged 18 and up, interviewing a total of 2,128 people; 1,022 of those polled were Republican/Lean Republican, 1,025 were Democrat/Lean Democrat, and 81 were Independent or “something else.”

In a vein similar to transgender-identifying men playing in women’s sports, the poll showed that the majority of Americans are not for sex changes in minors, either.

Respondents were asked “thinking about medications used for transgender care, do you think doctors should be able to prescribe puberty-blocking drugs or hormone therapy to minors between the ages of 10 and 18?”

A total of 71% of Americans do not think anyone under 18 should have access to such drugs or therapy.

Shortly after this poll, Trump signed an executive order “restricting transgender drugs and surgeries for minors,” The Center Square previously reported.

wisconsin sheriffs ice

Dear Wisconsin Sheriffs, Please Start Listing ICE Holds on Your Daily Jail Lists

This is an opinion piece. There are two immediate things that Wisconsin law enforcement and prosecutors...
rebecca dallet

2 Wisconsin Justices Say Court’s Liberals Are Trying to ‘Fast Track’ Overturning Act 10; Hagedorn Recuses

Conservative Justices Annette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley accused the liberal partisans on the state Supreme...
curtis o'brien

ALREADY FREE: Susan Crawford Ignited Uproar By Releasing Felon on $500 Bond Who Repeatedly Raped 5-Year-Old Girl

As a 5-year-old girl was being brutally and repeatedly raped by felon Curtis O'Brien, she...
santiago teniente

Susan Crawford Refused to Send Man to Prison Who Pointed Gun at Cops

Santiago Teniente could have faced more than 12 years in prison after he threatened police...
daniel blanchard

Susan Crawford Gave Slap on Wrist to Wisconsin Men Convicted of Child Porn

Daniel K. Blanchard was charged with 10 felony counts of child porn possession. So was...