U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court refuses to hear Florida appeal of its anti-drag law
Statute signed by Gov. DeSantis in May

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday rejected Floridaās emergency request to overturn two lower federal court rulings that blocked its law that targeted drag shows.
In a ruling by the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta last month, the court upheld an injunction issued by a U.S. District Court judge in Tallahassee last June that the Florida drag ban law was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad and that will not be allowed to take effect.
Floridaās law, dubbed the Protection of Children Act, makes it a crime to admit a child to an āadult live performanceā that the state deems sexually explicit. Signed into law by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) in May, the legislation makes it a misdemeanor offense. Florida had been the site of several enforcement threats against drag events, prompting some Pride celebrations to cancel their parades out of concern over the drag laws being weaponized against them.
The Hill reported three of the high courtās conservatives ā Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch ā publicly dissented and voted to revive the law.
Two other conservatives ā Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett ā voted with the majority to rule against Florida, but the duo indicated their votes donāt signify whether they believe the law is constitutional.
In the ruling from the 11th Circuit, the appellate justices cited major precedent over blocking overly-broad laws targeting freedom of speech, such as this section of Ashcroft v. ACLU, a first amendment lawsuit challenging portions of the Child Online Protection Act:
āThere are also important practical reasons to let the injunction stand pending a full trial on the merits. First, the potential harms from reversing the injunction outweigh those of leaving it in place by mistake. Where a prosecution is a likely possibility, yet only an affirmative defense is available, speakers may self-censor rather than risk the perils of trial. There is a potential for extraordinary harm and a serious chill upon protected speech. The harm done from letting the injunction stand pending a trial on the merits, in contrast, will not be extensive. No prosecutions have yet been undertaken under the law, so none will be disrupted if the injunction stands. Further, if the injunction is upheld, the Government in the interim can enforce obscenity laws already on the books.ā
Prior to the 11th Circuit ruling, the Florida drag ban had done significant harm in the state. Treasure Coast Pride Fest cancelled their pride parade, citing the new law, and also made it so that in person pride events would be 21-and-up. Tampa Pride likewise cancelled a large celebration. Several drag organizers expressed concern over how the law could be weaponized against them. Now, some of those questions are resolved, at least for the time being.
Florida isnāt alone in having its drag law halted from being enforced. This year, courts have put a stop to comparable laws in several other states. Days before Helena was set to host a Pride event, Montanaās anti-drag law was blocked. Tennesseeās drag law was similarly deemed unconstitutional and faced another block when a district attorney attempted to enforce it anyway in Blount County. Texasā prohibition on drag was also blocked as likely unconstitutional. However, in North Texas, Judge Kacsmaryk permitted a local college to implement a drag ban within his jurisdiction.
The Hill also reported the case now returns to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the full appeal. After a final ruling, the case could ultimately return to the justices.
Kavanaugh, in a statement joined by Barrett, said Floridaās request didnāt meet one of the criteria the justices look for in an emergency application: whether the Supreme Court has a āreasonable probabilityā of eventually agreeing to hear the issue on the merits.
āThe State has not made that showing here,ā Kavanaugh wrote.
But Kavanaugh cautioned that Floridaās emergency request dealt with the scope of the lower courtās injunction, not whether the law itself is constitutional.
āFloridaās stay application to this Court does not raise that First Amendment issue. Therefore, the Courtās denial of the stay indicates nothing about our view on whether Floridaās new law violates the First Amendment,ā he wrote.
Additional reporting by Erin Reed and The Hill.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to hear Md. religious freedom case on Tuesday
Advocacy groups to rally outside during Mahmoud v. Taylor oral arguments

Activists on Tuesday will hold a rally in front of the U.S. Supreme Court as the justices hear oral arguments in a case that will determine whether schools are violating parentsā religious freedom by not letting them opt their children out of learning about LGBTQ-specific topics.
Mahmoud v. Taylor is a case out of Montgomery County about parents who wish to opt their children out of LGBTQ-themed lessons in public schools for religious reasons.Ā
Montgomery County Public Schools, after initially allowing parents to opt their children out, changed the policy in March 2023.
The plaintiffs ā Tamer Mahmoud, Enas Barakat, and other parents ā argue āthe storybooks were chosen to disrupt ācisnormativityā and āeither/or thinkingā among students.ā
āThe board’s own principals objected that the curriculum was ānot appropriate for the intended age group,ā presented gender ideology as āfact,ā āsham[ed]ā students with contrary opinions, and was ādismissive of religious beliefs,āā according to the petition on the Supreme Courtās website.
The petition goes further, saying the parents are ānot challenging the curriculum, but arguing that compelling their elementary-age children to participate in instruction contrary to their parentsā religious convictions violated the Free Exercise Clause. Construing Wisconsin v. Yoder, the 4th Circuit found no free-exercise burden because no one was forced āto change their religious beliefs or conduct.āā
The Coalition for Inclusive Schools and Communities, an organization that aims to bring together āadvocates, educators, families, and organizations committed to inclusive, affirming, fact and science-based education,ā will participate in the āRally for Inclusive Educationā rally outside the Supreme Court alongside Live In Your Truth and the Montgomery County Pride Family.
āInclusive education isnāt just a value ā itās a necessity,ā said Phillip Alexander Downie, co-chair of the Coalition for Inclusive Schools and Communities and CEO of Montgomery County Pride Family. āThe right of every child to learn in an environment where they see themselves reflected, affirmed, and respected is under attack. This rally is our moment to protect that right ā and ensure future generations inherit classrooms rooted in truth, equity, equality, and justice.ā
The Coalition for Inclusive Schools and Communities says the rally is a ānonpartisan community gathering rooted in education, advocacy, and solidarity.ā
āThe focus of this event is to uplift the importance of inclusive learning environments, celebrate the power of diversity in our schools, and amplify the voices of those most impacted by exclusionary practices and rhetoric,ā it said.
The rally will feature speakers from across the country, including students, educators, civil rights leaders, and authors who will give their own testimonies as to why it is important to have inclusivity in primary education. Trans Maryland, the National Womenās Law Center, MoCoPride Center, and Authors Against Book Bans are among the LGBTQ groups sponsoring the event.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to hear conversion therapy case in October
Harmful and discredited practice is banned in 23 states and D.C.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a case about whether state and local governments can enforce bans on anti-LGBTQ conversion therapy for children, a discredited and harmful practice that has been banned by 23 states and D.C.
The case, which will be argued in the new term that begins in October, began in Colorado Springs, Colorado where a licensed professional counselor filed a challenge to a ban in 2022, arguing the law interferes with her ability to treat patients with āsame-sex attractions or gender identity confusionā who āprioritize their faith above their feelings.ā
The Supreme Court in 2023 declined to hear a challenge to conversion therapy bans out of Washington state, but conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh voted in favor of taking up the case.
The Colorado therapist, Kaley Chiles, is represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “a legal advocacy and training group that has supported the recriminalization of sexual acts between consenting LGBTQ adults in the U.S. and criminalization abroad; has defended state-sanctioned sterilization of trans people abroad; has contended that LGBTQ people are more likely to engage in pedophilia; and claims that a āhomosexual agendaā will destroy Christianity and society.”
The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado struck down Chiles’s lawsuit in 2022. Her case was appealed to the Supreme Court from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, which upheld the ban in 2023 on the grounds that it regulates professional conduct, not speech.
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released the following statement on Monday:
āThe Supreme Courtās decision to take up this case isnāt just about so-called ‘conversion therapy’ ā itās about whether extremists can use our courts to push their dangerous agenda, in an effort to erase LGBTQ+ people and gut protections that keep our kids safe. Thereās no debate: so-called āconversion therapyā is a dangerous practice, not therapy, and it has no place in our communities. These bans exist to protect LGBTQ+ children from harmāperiod.
Attacks on LGBTQ+ rights are the entry point to attacks on all of our rights. The same people trying to legalize abuse under the guise of ātherapyā are the ones banning books, ripping away reproductive rights, and undermining our democracy. The Supreme Court must uphold the 10th Circuit decision finding that these laws are constitutional.ā
HRC added, “So-called ‘conversion therapy,’ sometimes known as ‘reparative therapy,’ is a range of dangerous and discredited practices that falsely claim to change a personās sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.”
The group continued, “Such practices have been rejected by every mainstream medical and mental health organization for decades, but due to continuing discrimination and societal bias against LGBTQ+ people, some practitioners continue to conduct conversion therapy. Minors are especially vulnerable, and conversion therapy can lead to depression, anxiety, drug use, homelessness, and suicide.”
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court will not hear challenge to Tenn. drag restrictions
Republican lawmakers limited access to “adult entertainment” in 2023

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a case challenging Tennessee’s law restricting drag performances, which was enacted by Republican state lawmakers in 2023.
The Tennessee Adult Entertainment Act forbids āadult-oriented performancesā that take place in public or where they may be seen by minors. Legislators specified the legislation was meant to target drag shows.
A judge on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee ruled that the law was āunconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad,” allowing drag performances to continue in parts of the state. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of AppealsĀ reversed the decision in July, however, ruling that the theater company that filed the complaint lacked standing to sue.
President Donald Trump said that his decision to name himself chair of the Kennedy Center shortly into his second term came at least partially in response to the iconic performing arts center’s history of hosting drag shows, which he called āanti-American propaganda.ā
-
State Department5 days ago
HIV/AIDS activists protest at State Department, demand full PEPFAR funding restoration
-
Brazil5 days ago
US lists transgender Brazilian congresswoman’s gender as ‘male’ on visa
-
District of Columbia5 days ago
Capital Pride wins $900,000 D.C. grant to support WorldPride
-
Obituary4 days ago
Local attorney, LGBTQ rights advocate Dale Sanders dies at 75