Author name: Alec Johnson

The forces of good had a major victory at the Supreme Court:

Let’s put this topic and the recent SCOTUS decisions into plain English. “Title IX” is part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was signed into a law as an addition to the original 1964 legislation by president Richard Nixon in 1973. The original intent of Title IX was to protect girls and women from discrimination. Here is the original text:

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

In plain terms, this made it illegal for schools that take federal money to discriminate against girls. It has traditionally been interpreted to mean that schools must provide equal sports and scholastic opportunities for girls the same as they provide for boys. This led to the expansion of athletic programs for females in U.S. schools. 

But for the past 10 years, American leftists have lost their minds on matters of sex, insisting on adopting the woke idea of “gender identity.” An illusion made up by so-called “transgender” activists, “gender identity” is the false claim that people can be or “feel” either male or female despite their anatomy. That is to say, if a man or boy claims he is a woman or a girl, we have to consider that to be the truth. 

This is what the Biden administration believes, and it has reinterpreted Title IX to mean that boys who call themselves girls must be allowed to enter girls’ locker rooms and sports teams, for example.

About half the states have sued the federal government and persuaded courts to block implementation of these changes. In response, the Biden administration petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to allow it to implement the other Title IX changes, which are blocked along with the gender identity provisions in the states that have won court injunctions. 

The Supreme Court just said “no” in a  5-4 decision. The bottom line: this is not a final decision that stops the changes from Title IX from going into effect. It only means that the lower-court injunctions blocking Title IX changes in about half the states will stay in effect. The other states that approve of the Title IX changes will continue implementing them. The entire issue is very likely to wind up at the Supreme Court for a final decision. 

Most social media users were happy to see a return of (at least some) common sense on the “gender identity” issue, though some are still puzzled how the Democrat party ended up fighting to take away protections for women. 

This one is so on the mark it practically burns up the page:

And is there any issue you can’t find a Simpsons reference for? 

Few people would have believe you if, 20 years ago, you told them that one of the wholesome heartland states in America would become a cesspool of street violence, riots, and would be represented in Congress by a Somalian immigrant whose allegiance to her home country strikes many as outweighing her commitment to America. 

Sound extreme? Then why did Governor Tim Walz recently sign off on an “update” to the Minnesota flag that looks reminiscent of the Somalian flag? Here’s the old Minnesota flag:

Here’s the new Minnesota flag as of 2023:

And here’s the flag of Somalia:

Leftist media are insisting that anyone who believes the new state flag is a nod to Somalia has fallen for a “right wing conspiracy theory.” Maybe. But is it that hard to believe, given far-left progressive MN Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s track record?

It’s not just flags. All sorts of interesting things are coming out regarding Tim Walz, the progressive MN governor picked by Kamala Harris as her vice-presidential running mate. He’s being accused of stolen valor for allegedly lying about his military service, and for, supposedly, abandoning his military comrades to avoid being deployed to Iraq. 

You knew LGBTQ was going to come into this, didn’t you? Of course, Walz signed a bill last year that makes Minnesota a “sanctuary state” for so-called “trans kids” (there is no such thing as a transgender child because there is no such thing as a transgender person). What this means is that a parent who wants to mutilate her child can take him to Minnesota, and the state will not obey an extradition or arrest orders from the originating state—even if the family is in a custody battle and the father does not want his child surgically abused. 

So this won’t be any surprise, either. LibsofTikTok highlighted a story about how Walz used taxpayer money to hire a “Satanic” drag queen to perform at a show open to children. 

Draq queen “Martina Marracino,” who calls himself “Adam Divine” when filming pornographic films, specializes in making gay incest-themed adult movies. But that’s all just fine, because his drag performance in Minnesota was “made possible by the voters of Minnesota.” Huh? 

A poster advertising the show put it this way: “This activity is made possible by the voters of Minnesota through a grant from the East Central Regional Arts Council, thanks to a legislative appropriation from the arts and cultural heritage fund.”

It seems unlikely the majority of Minnesotans want their tax dollars going to a man who dresses as a woman and pretends to have sex with family members on camera, but what would we know?

Let’s see what social media users had to say: 

You’ve caught on to how the Democratic party is trying to portray ordinary conservatives as “weird,” recently. Perhaps it’s time to turn that around. 

This user had the same idea:

What say you, Wokespy readers? Who is weirder? Say, mean old JD Vance, or Minnesota’s “Tampon Timmy?”

Now that Kamala Harris has picked Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her vice-presidential running mate, we have a chance to look at Walz’s legislative record to see what the man really wants. 

More on that below, but first we have to prepare the ground to understand what’s at stake. Most people have no idea how much devilry springs from the writing of laws. Few have the time or the knowledge to read bills and proposed regulations down to the level of detail necessary to understand what the law will really do. 

Some of this is just the nature of legislative sausage-making. Even with the best efforts of drafters, effective legal language is sometimes going to be hard to understand. Your faithful correspondent used to specialize in reading and drafting proposed consumer protection laws, and it took time to translate these into plain English so both citizens and lawmakers understood exactly what they were being asked to consider. 

But the complication and confusion is sometimes by design. Activists know that not one in 10,000 citizens will read a bill all the way through, let alone carefully parse the definitions of terms used in the bill. Almost all legislation has a “definitions” section at the beginning. It’s a mini-dictionary. This section is necessary because the way lawmakers define common words in legislation is often different from the way regular people use those words. 

“Statutory construction” is the process drafters use to structure laws so that they convey their intended meaning and do not conflict with other existing laws. 

For example, pretend there’s a bill to regulate the exhaust coming out of car tail pipes. The proposed law is meant to govern only passenger cars, not utility vehicles like tractor-trailers or farm equipment. The bill would define “automobile” in a way that would read like this:

Automobile—a mechanized four-wheel conveyance powered by an internal combustion engine that is used for private non-commercial transportation of not more than eight passengers on ordinary roadways. For the purposes of this bill, the term ‘automobile’ shall not include conveyances such as buses, tractor trailers, utility trucks or motorcycles, or vehicles used exclusively to perform earth-moving or farm work.  

Now that you understand that, it will be easier to see the devil buried in the definitional details of a law signed by Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. The Republican National Committee’s “RNCResearch” Twitter/X account highlighted it:

Here is the bill’s language. Text that is stricken through will be deleted from the law. Text that is underlined will be added to the law. 

Notice what the RNC is pointing out. The bill deliberately removed language that would exclude pedophilia from the definition of sexual orientation. Put another way, the bill now considers pedophilic attractions to be a “sexual orientation” in the same way that being straight or gay is a sexual orientation.

What will be the effect? Because the law governs what Minnesota calls “human rights,” and because the law bans what it calls mistreatment or discrimination based on sexual orientation, pedophiles are now legally protected from “discrimination.” Under the old law, it would be illegal for a business to fire an employee who was gay. But under the new law, it would also now be illegal for a business to fire an employee who admitted he was attracted to children. 

Say a toy store found an employee with explicit child images on his social media. Naturally recognizing that such a person likely poses a risk to children in the store, the toy company wants to remove this employee. But now it can’t, because Tim Walz’s Minnesota says that’s an illegal act against the pedophile. So “Chester molester” gets to continue selling toys to children because the store will be prosecuted if it tries to protect its young customers from a possible predator. 

If you want a look at how radical Tim Walz’s progressive leftist policies really are, there is plenty out there.

When it comes to this bill, the good news is that many social media users appear to see what it’s really about:

But prepare to get angry. The left is so insistent on enacting its diabolical agenda that activists are disputing that this law is real. They are telling lies that are easy to disprove while calling people who are alarmed by the truth “MAGA cultists.”

It is Gene Trevino’s claims that are false. He is citing the removed and deleted section of the law that protected children, and falsely claiming that this protective section still exists. It does not. That was the entire point of the bill Walz signed, to remove that protection. You can confirm this for yourself by reading the law directly on the Minnesota Legislature’s Website. 

Keep your guard up, Wokespy readers. The devil is in the details, and he is ravenously hungry.