#

A federal judge ruled Monday that a male Plymouth Regional High School who identifies as a girl can still play on the girl’s soccer team.

United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty, an Obama appointee, issued a temporary restraining order allowing Parker Tirrell, 15, to keep playing, in violation of HB 1205, the new law banning biological boys from girls sports.

The order only applies to Tirrell and no other students in New Hampshire. However, McCafferty said in her order that a more broad injunction against the law is possible following a hearing set for Aug. 27.

The cause of the high school sports careers of Tirrell and Iris Turmelle, a Pembroke Academy boy who also identifies as a transgender girl, is being championed by GLAAD and the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire in the federal lawsuit filed earlier this month.

Turmelle is not playing on any fall sports teams and was not part of Monday’s hearing.

HB 1205 which took effect on Monday, was passed in the wake of a series of high-profile incidents in which biological males won girls championships or injured female competitors while playing girls sports in New England. But GLAAD lawyer Chris Erchull argued Monday that Tirrell has no physical advantages over the girls since having started hormone therapy, according to NHBulletin reporting.

Assistant Attorney General Michael DeGrandis argued against the temporary restraining order, telling McCafferty there is no need to block the law while the case is pending.

Monday’s hearing came as a social media rumor swirled that the state planned to make a deal on the temporary restraining order with Tirrell and the GLAD and ACLU lawyers. New Hampshire Department of Justice General Counsel Chris Bond told NHJournal no deal was ever in the works.

“There is not now and there never was a deal regarding entry of a TRO. The Attorney General’s Office is responsible for defending the duly enacted laws of the State of New Hampshire when they are challenged in court. Given that mandate, the AGO will not voluntarily assent to a TRO that would result in the temporary suspension of the provisions of [the law],” Bond said in an email.

Those on the left see McCafferty’s ruling as the first victory in abolishing the law.

“Transgender youth, like all adolescents, want and deserve every opportunity to experience joy, including through activities like school sports. We won’t stop fighting until they have that opportunity again,” the ACLU posted on social media.

Meanwhile, some on the right are frustrated, not by Monday’s ruling, but by the law itself. Cornerstone Action Executive Shannon McGinley said HB 1205 was doomed to fail due to the actions of Gov. Chris Sununu.

Last month, when Sununu signed HB 1205 to keep biological males out of girls sports he also vetoed HB 396, a law that would have made it legal for the state to make legal distinctions based on biological sex and separate men from women in bathrooms, locker rooms, and jails.

“The new law uses birth certificates as the definition of biological sex – an unwieldy and unworkable concept that has failed both practically and legally around the country,” McGinley said.

“What Gov. Sununu has just done is a fraud, not a compromise. He caved entirely to the most far left 10 percent of the state while giving nothing to female prisoners, athletes, and vulnerable students,” McGinley said.

Granite Staters are about to get more information about school spending thanks to the pro-transparency Students First Act that Gov. Chris Sununu signed into law this week.

The law requires school districts to detail basic information like the average cost per pupil, average teacher salary, and the salaries of the top administrators in their public reports. Too often, these details are not broken out before voters are asked to pass budgets at the ballot box, according to lawmakers.

“I think that parents are looking for accountability and transparency in education, and this bill takes us further in that direction,” said bill co-sponsor and House Education Committee Vice Chair Rep. Glenn Cordelli, (R-Tuftonboro.)

The Students First Act was originally introduced as SB 219, which ended up getting defeated during a House vote in May. It was subsequently added to HB 1265 which passed and was signed into law.

Another cosponsor, Sen. Keith Murphy (R-Manchester,) called the bill a common-sense law that gives taxpayers and parents the information they need to make informed decisions about budgets and tax rates.

“It’s so taxpayers can see where the money is going in their districts,” Murphy said during his testimony for the bill earlier this year.

New Hampshire’s public education system is spending more money to educate fewer students than ever before, according to Murphy. And the bulk of that money isn’t going to teachers in the classrooms, he said.

“Over the last two decades our cost per pupil is up 77 percent adjusting for inflation, while our teacher salaries are only up one percent,” Murphy said. “In the same 20-year period [the number] of our non-teaching staff is up 80 percent, the number of teachers is up only 23 percent.”

In the last 20 years, New Hampshire’s student population has declined more than 11 percent throughout the state, while the cost per pupil is at a record average of more than $20,000. 

The Students First Act mandates that school districts make public annual reports that show a 10-year history of average cost per pupil in that district, average teacher salary, and total administrator salaries, all adjusted for inflation. Additionally, districts must include a table listing the top four highest-paid administrators.

Murphy said it is possible for the average parent or taxpayer to find this information, but only with hours of research through district documents. 

Shannon McGinley, executive director at conservative advocacy group Cornerstone Action, said the bill will let parents know how much they are paying for district staff who don’t actually teach.

“These non-teaching staff include DEI consultants and auxiliary superintendents who enjoy six-figure salaries while often failing to demonstrate any return on the taxpayers’ considerable investment in their hiring,” McGinley said in a Cornerstone oped.

“By requiring school districts to report salaries for administrative positions and DEI consultants ahead of local school budget meetings, (the law) would shed light on these obfuscated costs for taxpayers before they are forced to foot the bill.”

One example: Rachael Blansett was hired in 2022 by the Oyster River School District in Durham, N.H., for a salary somewhere between $95,000 and $105,000 as a DEI officer.

Cordelli thinks the bill will clear away misinformation about what is really going on in school by making the numbers clear and available for everyone.

“A lot of people have no idea how much is being spent in public schools per student, even among teachers,” Cordelli said. 

Cordelli hopes showing how many non-teaching administrators there are and how much they earn will help explain the New Hampshire education spending paradox.

“At some point, parents and voters are going to say ‘why is the budget continuing to go up when the enrollment keeps going down,’” Cordelli said.

A biologically male athlete is expected to win big at the NHIAA indoor track championship this weekend while competing against girls. And there is currently nothing anyone can do about it. 

Not that Granite State Democrats want to. They’re opposing legislation to protect female athletes from male competitors. And one House Democrat dismissed concerns about the track meet as unimportant because it involves an “obscure competition.”

Kearsarge Regional High School sophomore Maelle Jacques, who competes on the Kearsarge girl’s team, has already racked up numerous first place wins competing against female athletes at other Division II schools over the past two seasons.

This season, Jacques dominated in the high jump competition and is the only athlete in the state competing in the girl’s division to break five feet. Competition among high school boys in New Hampshire has seen more than a dozen athletes break the five-foot mark this season.

Kearsarge Superintendent Winfried Feneberg released a statement declaring Jacques has the right to compete in any sport and as a member of any gender.

“Each student-athlete has the right to compete in the activity of their choice,” Feneberg said. “We believe that limiting access to any activity violates our core mission and vision, which are grounded in supporting every student and student-athlete’s right to pursue their goals and interests,”

Outspoken supporter of women’s athletics and 12-time All-American swimmer Riley Gaines responded to the Maelle Jacques story by calling out the athlete’s parents.

“How could the parents of this boy allow their son to cheat deserving women out of opportunities? And why don’t the parents of the girls stand up and say ‘no’ for their daughters?” Gaines posted on social media. “This country is full of failing, gutless mothers and fathers.”

The championship scheduled for Saturday at Plymouth State University is being held under the aegis of the New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association. While NHIAA Executive Director Jeffrey Collins did not respond to requests for comment, the organization is fully supportive of allowing athletes to choose their gender for the purposes of competition.

“The NHIAA is committed to providing transgender student-athletes with equal opportunities to participate in NHIAA athletic programs consistent with their gender identity,” the NHII eligibility policy states. “The NHIAA has concluded that it would be fundamentally unjust and contrary to applicable state and federal law to preclude a student from participation on a gender-specific sports team that is consistent with the public gender identity of that student for all other purposes.”

Parents could change this if they started getting involved at the local school board level, said Shannon McGinley, executive director of Cornerstone Action.

“If school boards feared their constituents more than they feared (law firm) Drummond Woodsum and leftist superintendents, in a matter of months, we could have half the school districts in the state organized into an alternative NHIAA,” McGinley said. “The solution is for parents to stop accepting cowardly excuses from school board members who ran as conservative.”

Sen. Tim Lang (R-Sanbornton) is sponsoring SB 524 to address what he sees as the basic unfairness of male athletes forcing their way into sports for girls and women. Lang’s bill requires high school and college athletes to compete in the division that matches their biological sex at birth. 

“I’m a father of four kids, two of whom are girls, and I would not want my daughters bumped from a sports team because a biological male, who had a physiological advantage, chose to play on that sports team,” Lang said.

Biologically male athletes have inherent and obvious physical advantages against women and girls, he said. Medical science shows men have high bone density, more muscle mass, and even process oxygen differently than women, Lang said.

Rep. Timothy Horrigan (D-Dover) testified against SB 524 on Tuesday, arguing that “so-called ‘biological females’” did not need protection from males in their sports.

“We’re especially worried about cis women or cis girls, but this also prevents trans men from competing,” Horrigan said.

And Horrigan dismissed the case of Maelle Jacques because it involves an “obscure competition.”

“We don’t even know if she’s actually trans,” Horrigan said of Jacques, “but if she is, that’s certainly a very unfair thing [to keep her from competing]. A lot of these cases, they are pretty obscure competitions that normally sports fans wouldn’t be paying much attention to.”

Lang says his bill is not an attempt to create culture war headlines over people who suffer from gender dysphoria. He simply wants to protect women’s sports and preserve the mission of Title IX.

“This isn’t about gender; this is about biological sex,” Lang said.

New Hampshire Democrats are using abortion cases before the U. S. Supreme Court to renew their push for unrestricted abortion access in the Granite State.

“We are at a crisis moment for abortion rights: The threat to the constitutional right to an abortion has never been greater in our country. Six months from now, abortion could be illegal in half the country,” said Kayla Montgomery, vice president for public affairs at Planned Parenthood New Hampshire Action Fund.

The Supreme Court held oral arguments on Wednesday as it considers whether the state of Mississippi can ban abortion at 15 weeks. The court previously heard arguments on the Texas law banning abortion at six weeks, and a decision on that case is pending.

It’s possible the court could overturn either the 1992 Casey decision or the 1973 Roe decision, both of which restricted the right of voters to pass laws regulating abortion. Some court watchers believe they heard Chief Justice John Roberts suggest a way to leave the Mississippi law in place without overturning Roe.

A decision is expected in June.

Gov. Chris Sununu, a self-described pro-choice Republican who supports upholding Roe v. Wade, signed a 24-week abortion ban when he approved the state budget. The ban was forced into the budget bill by House conservatives who threatened to derail the legislation over the ban. He has since said he supports removing the requirement that all women seeking abortions be required to undergo an ultrasound first.

According to Cornerstone, a non-partisan, non-profit Christian advocacy organization, the description of the ultrasound as mandatory is inaccurate.

“Under the act, performing an abortion without an ultrasound will only be punished in one situation: where there is a “substantial risk” that the child is at least 24 weeks old. In any other circumstance, the provider can skip the ultrasound and face no penalties under the act,” the group says in a fact sheet on the new law.

Asked about the Mississippi case this week, Sununu told NHJournal he wasn’t paying attention to it and does not believe Roe will be overturned.

Devon Chaffee, executive director of the ACLU of New Hampshire, said if the Supreme Court ends Roe, abortion in New Hampshire is still legal for the first six months. Chaffee and Montgomery stood with state lawmakers on Wednesday promising legislative action to make sure abortion stays legal no matter what happens in Washington.

“Unfortunately, it is no longer an option for us to count on the U.S. Supreme Court to protect our reproductive rights,” said state Sen. Rebecca Whitley, D-Contoocook. “Now is the time to take proactive action to protect abortion access in New Hampshire.”

Democrats want abortion rights codified in state law, and they are pushing to undo the 24-week ban and return to the policy of unrestricted legal abortion at any point in a pregnancy.

All the members of New Hampshire’s congressional delegation came out in support of upholding Roe on Wednesday, as well as the federal effort to make sure abortion rights are protected from the Supreme Court. Rep. Chris Pappas said the Women’s Health Protection Act, supported by all members of the delegation, will codify Roe as federal law.

“We can no longer count on the Supreme Court to defend Roe and be the backstop as they have been – in this new era it’s up to us to fight back,” Pappas said.

Supporters of overturning Roe v. Wade have long argued that abortion should be regulated by the democratic process as Pappas suggests, not a court’s ruling.

Sen. Maggie Hassan called the Mississippi ban “extreme” and devastating for women.

“This is one of the most extreme abortion bans in the country and it would take us back to almost 50 years ago,” Hassan said.

Shannon McGinley, executive director of Cornerstone Action of New Hampshire, called out Democrats for equating New Hampshire’s 24-week ban with Mississippi’s law or the fetal heartbeat bill in Texas.

“The currently pending Supreme Court cases challenging abortion law in Mississippi and Texas are not going to have any legal effect on our law in New Hampshire,” McGinley said. “Our law prohibits abortion at six months, not 15 weeks (Mississippi) or six weeks (Texas). Those trying to link New Hampshire’s moderate law with these other states are ignoring the facts.”

Both major Supreme Court abortion decisions, Roe and Casey, allow for states to restrict abortion at some point in the pregnancy. Even those restrictions are considered loose compared to most developed countries, which set the limits at 12 to 15 weeks for elective abortions.

McGinley said Democrats are engaging in misinformation to push for complete, unrestricted access to abortion.

“Planned Parenthood’s position and messaging is predictable in its attempt to cynically sway public opinion,” she said. “With every elected branch of government in New Hampshire led by Republicans, not by Planned Parenthood, there is no reason why we shouldn’t be able to protect a law with absolutely no impediment to abortion access in those first six months, but that does balance that access with commonsense protections for the late-term pre-born.”

A bill banning discrimination against gender identity appears to be in trouble in the New Hampshire House. Before the House votes, House Speaker Shawn Jasper is recommending that representatives table the bill.

“The bill is just not ready to move forward,” he told the Concord Monitor. “My concern is with those who are transitioning … going into restrooms, showers, locker rooms, anyplace where it may make someone uncomfortable for a whole myriad of reasons.”

House Bill 478 would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. At least 18 other states, including other New England states like Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, have gender identity anti-discrimination laws on the books, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

New Hampshire already has a law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, but not gender identity. A previous version of this bill was defeated in 2009, but former Gov. Maggie Hassan signed an executive order banning gender identity discrimination in state government.

The current bill passed the House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee on a 15-2 vote, and includes sponsors from high-ranking Democrats and Republicans, including House Democratic Leader Steve Shurtleff and Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley.

Over the weekend, lawmakers’ email accounts were flooded with comments about the legislation. More than 800 emails since Friday appeared in representatives’ inboxes through the House-wide listserv, according to reports. The hard part is sifting through it all to determine who is writing and where its coming from.

Some of the emails were templates from people who didn’t give an address or full name, making it difficult to determine if they were state residents or not, and lawmakers said they were receiving more emails in opposition than in support of the bill, resulting in some representatives changing their support.

“The public is not ready,” wrote Rep. Jess Edwards, R-Auburn, in an email to all House members on Sunday. Edwards backed the bill in committee, but changed his mind after the influx in messages.

“The number of people who have written stating that this bill essentially offers their children up to sexual predators is outrunning by 5 to 1 the number of emails stating that it’s time to end the daily beatings of transgendered people,” he added. “The passionate are yelling past each other with worst case scenarios. I don’t think this is an environment in which the legislature should pick a side.”

Advocates of the bill turned out in overwhelming support for the bill when the committee heard public testimony on it in February, making it seem like it had the majority of public backing and would sail through the rest of the Republican-led Legislature. They say the protections are needed for transgender people, who testified they have been fired, harassed, or discriminated against because of their gender identity.

“I have experienced way too many instances of employment discrimination,” said Shana Aisenberg, a transgendered woman from Freedom who is a musician and music teacher, at the hearing. “Musicians with whom I play stopped calling me. Students cancelled lessons. A music camp where I taught for 10 years fired me because I changed my gender.”

However, opponents of the bill said it could lead to men entering women’s bathrooms to take advantage of them. The bill is not specifically about bathrooms, but it’s an example that’s been widely used throughout the country. Conservatives say it’s about protecting the rights of privacy and religious liberty for New Hampshire residents.

On the religious liberty front, Cornerstone Action is claiming that the bill would negatively impact churches and religious organizations. A lawsuit could potentially arise out of churches, faith-based charities, schools, and ministries who are protected by the state religious exemption, but it’s only applied to “persons of the same religioun or denomination.”

Law experts have argued that these faith-based organizations would have to check everyone at the door to determine if they are of the same religion or denomination in order to maintain separate gender bathrooms. Even if someone argues that they belong to the same religion, they could sue for discrimination against their rights, and the legal fees could be crippling for the faith-based groups. They point to an incident that happened in Massachusetts last year as an example.

Cornerstone Chairman Charlie McKinney wrote a letter to constituents asking them to sign on to a petition that would go to Jasper. The petition states the bill puts “the feelings of gender-confused individuals” over citizen privacy and safety.

“For centuries, we have had social mores, now dubbed ‘discriminatory,’ that are in truth loving, since they informally embraced a moral code that pointed to acceptance of how God created us,” he wrote in the letter. “Although most of the national press on this issue has focused on bathrooms, that’s not what is really at stake for us as Christians. At issue here, as with most other social issues, is the freedom to declare the Truth and conform our lives to the will and design of our Father and Creator.”

It’s possible that a majority of Jasper’s emails are coming from people who signed the petition, which includes a pre-written text. But Freedom New Hampshire, a group that supports the bill, also has a similar message on its website for people to sign, click, and send to their representatives.

“This legislation is about leveling the playing field. Everyone deserves to work hard, put a roof over their head and participate in public life without constant fear of discrimination,” the note states. “But because there are no explicit protections for transgender people under state law in housing, employment, or public accommodations, they must live in fear every day of being wrongly fired, evicted, or denied service—just because of who they are.”

Yet, the possible defeat, or delay, of this bill could have been expected, according to a recent survey on the bill. The Citizens Count, NH’s Live Free or Die Alliance — a nonpartisan organization looking to give citizen’s a voice in their local government — conducted a Facebook survey of New Hampshire residents on their support for the bill in January.

Approximately 56 percent of respondents said they opposed the bill and 44 percent said they supported it. Of course, the methodology is not an exact science, but the results and testimony provide insight from people who might not be able to attend a public hearing at the State House in the middle of a work day.

The national debate on transgender rights comes at a difficult time in the community’s fight. It started last year when North Carolina passed a bill requiring people to use public restrooms that match the gender on their birth certificates. Texas is poised to take up a similar bill during the current legislative session.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.