Montana businesses fight for drag storytime
A Trans woman, an indie bookstore, and a teacher have teamed up in Montana to challenge a new state law that bans people dressed in drag from reading to children in public schools and libraries. By specifically banning drag kings and queens without mention of sexual elements, the law is a national first.

On the constitutional grounds of free speech rights and equal protection, the plaintiffs seek to have the law temporarily blocked. They also seek damages for Adria Jawort, whose talk on LGBTQ+ history at the Butte-Silver Bow Public Library was canceled by officials, who cited the new legislation.

Republican Rep. Braxton Mitchell, who sponsored the bill, said that "keeping hypersexualized events out of taxpayer-funded schools and libraries" is not a violation of the First Amendment.

Montana Book Co. co-owner Chelsia Rice says she and her spouse joined the plaintiffs "to make sure everyone who this law affects is supported and defended by those that have the wherewithal and fortitude to do it."

Other plaintiffs include a fitness studio, an independent theater that receives state money and shows PG-13 and R-rated films, and other businesses, organizations, and community centers that host all-ages drag events.

Court reinstates Tennessee ban on gender affirming care for minors
The US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled on Saturday last weekend that a Tennessee law banning doctors from providing gender-affirming care to Trans minors can go into effect immediately. The panel of three judges voted 2-1 that the plaintiffs were unlikely to prevail on their claims that the law is unconstitutional.

"Life-tenured federal judges should be wary of removing a vexing and novel topic of medical debate from the ebbs and flows of democracy by construing a largely unamendable federal constitution to occupy the field," wrote Judge Jeffrey Sutton.

Sutton also wrote that "these initial views, we must acknowledge, are just that: initial. We may be wrong."

Meanwhile medical associations have argued that gender-affirming care can be life-saving, and other federal judges have found that similar bans violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law.