Anyone who uses a cell phone or laptop shares hundreds of personal data points, and a New Mexico advocacy group wants that information better protected.

Nathan Saavedra, programs manager for Equality New Mexico, said personal information such as gender, marital status, household income and educational level are catalogued by tech organizations and data brokers.

"We see data privacy as the primary gap that exists, especially in New Mexico, for protecting all people," he said. "And this is especially true for LGBTQ folks, women or anyone who is seeking reproductive or gender-affirming health care, immigrants, political dissidents."

Two privacy bills introduced in New Mexico's legislative session this year - the Community Safety and Privacy Act and the Patient Records Privacy Act - failed to pass. Saavedra said he believes when it comes to sharing data, consumers should always have the ability to "opt-in" rather than "opt-out," which assumes consent for data gathering unless users actively decline.

Saavedra admitted that the term "data privacy" can be confusing, but he said the current political climate makes it important to understand because hostile agencies can use information to discriminate, harass and persecute people. He noted that at President Donald Trump's inauguration last year, the most exclusive seats were reserved for powerful tech CEOs, who also are among the world's richest men.

Saavedra said he sees it as a sign the Trump administration won't prioritize confidentiality.

"So, we see data privacy and the information that is viewable by these data brokers or any organization or even an individual who wishes to purchase or find this data is a main priority for protecting vulnerable New Mexicans," he said.

He added that Equality New Mexico will continue to push lawmakers to pass new data privacy laws.

A 2023 Pew Research Center survey found 71% of Americans were worried about government use of people's data. Additionally, 67% said they understand little to nothing about what companies are doing with their personal data.

The Pentagon will begin removing transgender troops from the military after the Supreme Court ruled last week that a ban could be enforced as lawsuits progress.

In January, President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning transgender people from serving. As the Pentagon put the policy in place, it faced a number of legal challenges.

Navy veteran Lindsay Church, executive director of Minority Veterans of America, said the court's decision has left many transgender service members in Maryland in a difficult situation.

"People are worried about what comes next, where they're going to live, what their health care situation is going to be, how they're going to be employed, how quickly they're going to be purged from the military," said Church. "And all of these things are also happening at the same time that they're still wearing the uniform and continuing to carry out their jobs, whether that be here or on deployment. They're taking care of our nation and they're also wondering if they're going to have a job."

In the executive order, Trump wrote that transgender people lack the "humility and selflessness" to serve in the military.

At an event last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also said the military is done with pronouns.

Some estimates put the number of transgender service members at higher than 15,000, just under 1% of troops.

Opponents of the ban say nearly 75% of transgender troops have served for more than a decade, adding transgender people are twice as likely to have served in the military.

Church said that if the Pentagon wants to have a lethal and effective military, then transgender participation is necessary.

"You're looking at many, many, many years and a lot of investment that's going to be lost by the Department of Defense in the interest of bias," said Church. "Most of this policy has been continued to proved to be rooted in animus and bias, and not in actual benefits to our national security."

A Gallup poll in February found 58% of Americans support allowing transgender people to openly serve in the military.

That's a drop from 71% in 2019, largely driven by declining support among Republicans.




get more stories like this via email

LGBTQ+ advocates in South Dakota are reeling from passage of another state law they said harms their community. Now, there is concern possible changes to the federal budget could eliminate a tool that provides a sympathetic ear.

The Trump administration's emerging federal spending plan includes possible cuts to funds that cover a specialized service under the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline. The specific feature gets routed calls from LGBTQ+ youth who have expressed suicidal ideation.

There are unknowns about what service disruptions would look like. But in a worst-case scenario, Rachel Polan, president of Sioux Falls Pride, said not having someone on the line who understands them would be a blow.

"Some of these kids don't have any supportive voices in their life," Polan observed. "They are exploring an identity that maybe they came out and were rejected by family or friends in their area."

The Trevor Project found LGBTQ+ youth are four times as likely to attempt suicide than their peers. The group is among those reporting the White House's plans following a leaked memo. The Health and Human Services agency is undergoing a major reorganization officials say aligns with the vision of its new Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The specialized 988 service has logged more than 1.2 million crisis contacts since its launch.

The news comes several weeks after South Dakota's governor signed a bill to prohibit trans students from using communal facilities at public schools matching their gender identity. The governor said it represents freedom from a "woke" agenda.

Polan countered affected youth might feel even more isolated as a result, and potentially losing easier access to a trained voice to hear them out could make things even worse.

"Especially in our rural areas in South Dakota where counseling services might not be acceptable for some of these youth, acceptable or accessible," Polan explained. "I could definitely see more tragedies, self-harm, suicidal behaviors, and unfortunately, more deaths could occur."

Advocates stressed it is even more important to maintain the crisis service for this population. Congress does have a say in the next budget and it is unclear how the administration's push for cutting discretionary funds will play out when those talks ramp up toward the Oct. 1 deadline.


get more stories like this via email

By Vanessa Davidson / Broadcast version by Farah Siddiqi reporting for the Kent State NewsLab-Ohio News Connection Collaboration.

Ohio’s House Bill 8, known as the “Parents’ Bill of Rights,” will take effect April 9.

The bill was signed into law in January. It requires K-12 public schools to adopt a policy for parents to be notified by their child’s school if they have “any substantial change in the student's services, including counseling services,” or in their “mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being.”

This includes any request by the student to “identify as a gender that does not align with the student's biological sex,” meaning if they are not already out to their parents, schools will be required to do it for them.

Advocates for LGBTQ+ youth worry the bill will cause unnecessary anxiety for students.

“It’s part of such a long string of attacks against [queer and trans students’] identities and their very right to exist,” said Mallory Golski, civic engagement and advocacy manager at Kaleidoscope Youth Center. She says young people are considering leaving the state because, “while this legislation just targets K-12 schools right now, they know it’s only a matter of time until their lives are impacted beyond that.”

And educators worry that the bill will cause conflicts between district guidelines and state law.

“It really puts counselors and other people in this rock and a hard place position because it’s so absolutist,” said Carrie Frederick, a school counselor at East Columbus High School.

The bill says parents have “a fundamental right” to make decisions about their children in schools.

Ohio State Rep. D. J. Swearingen, one of the two primary sponsors of the bill, said in a press release, “I’m grateful to see the Parents’ Bill of Rights officially cross the finish line. This critical legislation will ensure parents have a voice when it comes to the health and wellbeing of their children.”

Swearingen, former State Rep. Sara Carruthers, the other primary sponsor of the bill, and others who testified for the bill did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Educator concerned about supporting queer students

Frederick said he worries about how the bill will affect students’ coming out processes.

“I definitely know there are students out there that are going to have a lot of anxiety, even if maybe they don’t need to,” Frederick said. “They don’t know that.”

Frederick said school counselors help students navigate the uncertainty of how parents might react to their coming out. Counselors can walk students through the typical process, which starts with coming out to one or two people a child is close with, then a small friend group and, finally, adults they trust.

“The vast majority, they would like to come out to their parents as part of that process, but they’re not always going to be ready the first day,” Frederick said. “We miss that opportunity, if the immediate reaction is, ‘I have to tell your parents right now,’ then now, we’ve broken that student’s trust.”

Frederick said his district’s ethical standards say that part of supporting students is not outing them to anyone they do not want to be outed to. After H.B. 8 takes effect, those guidelines are now in direct conflict with state law, he said.

Scott DiMauro, president of the Ohio Education Association, said his organization is working in collaboration with the Ohio School Counselor Association to analyze the law and give their members the best guidance they can to adhere to the law and still fulfill their responsibilities as educators.

But, he said the definitions in the bill are vague, and a lot of it is open to interpretation.

“Does an offhanded comment by a student that’s made to another student but overheard by a teacher, does that rise to the level where a teacher needs to call the parent?” he said. “That’s one of the big concerns that we had about the bill is that the bill, in a lot of ways, creates more questions than answers.”

Ensuring students feel safe at school

DiMauro said the bill creates a sense of fear for both educators and students, as well as the concern that people are going to be looking over their shoulders, censoring themselves and limiting what they teach due to fear of a lawsuit or an adverse reaction from a parent.

A 2023 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that an estimated 40% of transgender and questioning students were bullied at school, and 69% of questioning students and 72% of transgender students experienced “persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness, a marker for experiencing depressive symptoms.”

“Allowing somebody to be themselves takes away that one aspect of their focus that day,” said Golski of the Kaleidoscope Youth Center. “By removing that one factor and knowing that, ‘Okay, when I go into this classroom, at least my teacher is going to accept me,’ that opens up their ability to focus on what they actually need to be focusing on in schools.”

Frederick said his plan after April 9 is to be as transparent as possible with his students, making sure they are aware of what information he has to share with their guardians before they tell him confidential information. But, the younger the student, the harder it will be for them to understand.

Golski said districts can comply with the law in gentle ways, too. She suggested that if a student discloses information about their sexual orientation for the first time, teachers or counselors might report it to a family member who may be more supportive than another, for instance.

“Teachers shouldn’t just jump to not supporting their queer and trans students at all,” she said.

She also said districts should be cautious before jumping to immediately creating an overly harsh policy, and that adults in schools should make sure it is widely known that they are supportive of queer and trans students.

DiMauro suggested joining the LGBTQ+ caucus at the national and state level, and in schools, putting up ‘I’m here’ safe stickers on windows or places students will see so they know they can trust teachers to be on their side.

“At the end of the day, it’s these young people’s lives, and they’re the ones who have to wake up every day and get ready for school knowing that they’re going to have to face this as an actual reality,” Golski said. “Legislators, by targeting queer and trans students with this legislation, are bullying students, and that is the real detraction from students’ ability to receive a quality education.”


This collaboration is produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email