SACRAMENTO, CA – California state lawmakers this week terminated two Republican-backed bills to restrict transgender players from girls and women school teams, putting the national debate over transgender athletes on center stage, according to Mercury News.
After Gov. Gavin Newsom said that it was “deeply unfair” to have transgender athletes in female sports, his fellow Democrats, who control the Legislature, held a hearing on the two proposals in the state Assembly, and quashed the proposals in strict party-line votes after hundreds of residents “packed the hearing room to voice their opinions,” reported the Mercury News.
Kate Sanchez, Orange County Republican Assemblymember, introduced Assembly Bill 89, which would have required the California Interscholastic Federation to only allow female-at-birth people to participate in sports for girls and women, stated Mercury News.
Bill Essayli, Riverside County Republican Assemblymember, introduced a companion bill, Assembly Bill 844, to require student-athletes at all school levels to play on teams and use locker rooms and other facilities that correspond to the sex they were assigned at birth, wrote the Mercury News, noting California law has protected gender identity for more than a decade.
Robert Rivas, Democratic Assembly Speaker, substituted in for a Southern California Democratic Committee Member to condemn the bills and cast an opposing vote—an unusual step, claimed Mercury News.
Mercury News reported Rivas, along with other Democrats, said that “it’s unknown how many transgender students play sports in California but that the number is likely very small.”
Mercury News said, nationally, about one percent of people identify as transgender, and Rivas charged “there is no epidemic of transgender kids playing basketball, soccer or any other sport for that matter.”
But cisgender female athletes and their conservative backers stated their own rights and safety were being ignored when transgender women compete in sports, according to Mercury News.
The Mercury News reported the more than three-hour hearing was intense, noting Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles) compared the bills’ supporters to Nazis when Matt Walsh, a national conservative activist, stated transgender women were “deluded or confused men.”
The Mercury News claimed the bills were “doomed to fail” in the Democratic-controlled Legislature, noting Democrats held a supermajority, and that the sports committee, chaired by San Diego Democrat Chris Ward, also headed the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus (advocates for transgender residents).
Last month, when Democratic Gov. Newsom implied that “transgender girls unfairly compete against their cisgender opponents” while speaking with Charlie Kirk—a conservative activist—the Democratic Legislative Caucus condemned Newsom, according to the Mercury News.
The Mercury News wrote Republicans introduced the legislation, as debates about gender identity and transgender students’ rights rocked school communities and classrooms across the state.
As reported by the Mercury News, dozens of people asked lawmakers to reject the bills, claiming they were transgender or queer, or parents of transgender children.
According to Mercury News, polls suggest the issue was a liability for Democrats, but Melissa Michelson, a professor of political science at Menlo College, said Democrats “likely expected they’d elicit a positive response from the public by standing with transgender people during the hearing…they (Democrats) think this is a winning issue for them.”
Keep it up Democrats, this is an issue that might lead California to sway red.
“Only 24% of Californians think males (transgender) should compete in female sports”
“Voters are increasingly concerned about the direction of California under one-party rule,” said Owen Brennan, president of Madison McQueen.”
https://www.kabc.com/2025/03/19/republican-revolution-even-hitting-california/
Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it — Leo Tolstoy
Women/girls being forced to compete against men is what’s wrong and it won’t cease until good people stand up against it.
But I want you and your ilk to keep believing your way so we can keep hope alive that California will finally come to its senses and vote red.
I do not care. I was for gay marriage in 2008 when the voters of California voted in Prop 8. I was against the death penalty all my life, when the voters supported it. I will not bend my morality to the whims of the voters. Silence in the face of evil is evil.
Yes, silence in the face of evil is evil.
That’s why good people are fighting back and not going to be silenced in their quest to protect women.
I wonder if you recognize how similar your framing is to the language historically used to justify segregation and exclusion under the guise of protection. During the Jim Crow era, segregationists often claimed their defending “the purity of white women” or “the sanctity of community values.” They hid behind these frames to depict their efforts not as bigotry, but as an act of defense. Moreover, the rhetoric of “good people fighting back” was in fact a staple of resistance to racial integration, particularly in schools and yes… sports. Did you intentionally load your comment in buzzwords from the past or did you just swallow this frame wholecloth?
Wow, segregationists, Jim Crow, bigotry, and I’m the one using buzzwords?
Well at least you didn’t invoke Nazis, this time anyway.
You will never shame me for being on the side of protecting women being forced to compete against men in sports.
If you are so offended by my questions, why are you using the EXACT SAME LANGUAGE? You would think if there is a legitimate issue, the framing could be updated – there is certainly a legitimate argument to be made for your position, yet you didn’t use it.
“there is certainly a legitimate argument to be made for your position, yet you didn’t use it.”
So KO didn’t use the legitimate argument, he used the illegitimate one? LOL
“the Democratic Legislative Caucus condemned Newsom”
I’m wondering if this is some weird 5-dimensional chess. With Newsom craving the Whitehouse, he cozies up to Charlie Kirk, is condemned by his own party, but on an issue that is 80-20 nationally, so it becomes a win for Newsom in his national aspirations?
nah . . . well . . . . . . nah!
“I’m wondering if this is some weird 5-dimensional chess. With Newsom craving the Whitehouse, he cozies up to Charlie Kirk, is condemned by his own party, but on an issue that is 80-20 nationally, so it becomes a win for Newsom in his national aspirations?”
Newsom isn’t that sleazy, is he? cough, cough…