Editorial: Phew. Anti-transgender measure won't be on the November ballot

[Jessica_Rose]

Editorial: Phew. Anti-transgender measure won't be on the November ballot

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/editorial-phew-anti-transgender-measure-won-t-be-on-the-november-ballot/ar-BB1noh9a?ocid=windirect&cvid=381db87515af4938831c818a1baba8a8&ei=41

Opinion by The Times Editorial Board (31 May 2024)

A dozen statewide propositions have qualified for the November ballot. It's a lot, although one or more could be pulled from consideration in the coming months.

Thankfully, voters won't face a discriminatory proposition that would have required teachers and school administrators to inform parents about their child's gender identity at school and to enact anti-trans bathroom and sports policies for students. Proponents of the ironically named Protect Kids California campaign, which also would have restricted medical care for transgender youth, announced this week that they failed to gather the more than half a million signatures needed to qualify for the November ballot.

Still it's disheartening that the group was able to collect more than 400,000 signatures from mostly Southern California counties. We don't know if all of the signatures are valid; but if even half are, that's a lot of Californians who either don't fully understand what the measure would do, agree with it or don't care.

They should care, because the proposal is intolerant, mean-spirited and completely unnecessary. There's no evidence of a wave of students being assaulted or harassed by transgender classmates. The only trend is that cities and states run by Republicans have embraced these anti-transgender policies, mislabeling them "parental rights."

[LoriDee]

I like that California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta challenged the ballot title of the proposed measure. Then a Sacramento Superior Court Judge tentatively sided with Bonta, who titled the measure the "Restrict Rights of Transgender Youth" initiative, while backers wanted to call it the "Protect Kids of California Act."

Truth in legislation should be mandatory. But... politics.

[KathyLauren]

Could I ask, please, that news stories such as this, that refer to state policies, mention the state in the subject line?  I did see three paragraphs down that this article mentioned California.  I have seen other such news stories posted recently where the state in question was harder to identify. 

The articles in question are poorly written by the original authors. It would be helpful to prevent confusion to add the state to the subject line.

[LoriDee]

@KathyLauren

That's a good point. Thank you!

I'll do that for the ones I post.

Side note: The news posting rules state that we quote the headline exactly. But I think we can safely add the state in brackets at the beginning of the body text, so it doesn't affect the quote.