Tennessee Senate Passes Bill Making "Recruiting" For Trans Youth Care A Felony
www.erininthemorning.com
The bill could have far ranging impacts in Tennessee and outside of the state, and could be broadly used to target health care professionals across state lines.

Show

Show

Tennessee has recently passed a bill, effective July 1st 2024, declaring it a class-C felony to "recruit, harbor, or transport an unemancipated minor within this state" for transgender healthcare procedures, carrying a sentence of 3-15 years in prison. This applies over state lines and states that do not have anti-extradition laws relating to trans rights can extradite you to Tennessee.

Notably: the bill is vague. This means: telling stories of your own transition, describing your healthcare experiences to an open group chat, describing your trans experiences on a public website, creating trans health guides online, describing how you have gotten DIY HRT, describing anything to do with trans healthcare, even as a cis person, can result in a class-C felony conviction.

Given that being arrested in any capacity for transgender people can be an incredibly dangerous experience (CW: SV), I strongly suggest you begin caring about opsec, stop referring to where you live, use VPNs, stop using apps like Discord, and stop using social media sites that track your IP or user agent fingerprint while unprotected. Remember that for a bill like this to be challenged in court, you have to be arrested first.

Will discuss creating / linking to a transgender matrix chat so that we can help people to move off of things like discord.

    • kristina [she/her]M
      ·
      8 months ago

      If a minor from Tennessee reads it, it's possible if it's not on that map. I'm sure some psychoes might use their kids to try to mess with trans people in this way

      Technically if you ever travel to one of the bad states you could also be extradited. Only 14 states have protection

        • marxisthayaca [he/him,they/them]
          ·
          8 months ago

          there's no point asking that question, the supreme court just does the mental gymnastics necessary to make something constitutional or not.

            • SacredExcrement [any, comrade/them]
              ·
              8 months ago

              That's old hat now

              In an 8-1 ruling, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the Immigration and Nationality Act does not require immigration judges to hold bond hearings after six months to determine if a non-citizen should be released while their case proceeds or is a flight risk or danger to the community. Agreeing with the Biden administration, Sotomayor said there was "no plausible construction of the text" of the statute that would mandate the government provide for such bond hearings and that the law did not even hint at such a requirement.

              In a separate decision, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that federal district courts lack the authority to issue injunctions to force the government to release immigrants after 180 days without a bond hearing on a class-wide basis.

              The decision reversed the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld decisions by judges in California and Washington barring the government from detaining immigrants without bond headings after 180 days.

              I don't think I need to tell you what the aggregate meaning of those two decisions is

    • StalinIsMaiWaifu@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      8 months ago

      IANAL, if it's like recording laws (basing on swift v Kanye) then no, as long as you are not in TN a when you post it's not a crime

      I didn't read the op well enough 🎵

      • kristina [she/her]M
        ·
        8 months ago

        This law is based on abortion extradition laws