University of Louisville officials have agreed to pay nearly $1.6 million to settle their case with Dr. Allan Josephson, the professor whom the university demoted, then canned for speaking out against child sex changes, after 15 years of distinguished service.

“I’m glad to finally receive vindication for voicing what I know is true,” Josephson said in a statement Monday.

Gender ideology and the sex-change regime it gave rise to in the West have suffered a series of mortal blows in recent years.

The practice of so-called gender-affirming care has been outed as ruinous pseudo-science; practitioners have been damned by their own words as freewheeling mutilators; and LGBT activists’ narrative in support of sex changes has collapsed in the face of mounting contradictory evidence. Meanwhile, across the country and beyond, lawmakers have passed legislation and policy affirming the meaningful and immutable distinction between men and women, preventing the invasion by men of women’s spaces, and protecting children from sex-change procedures.

While popular opinion is now unmistakably against gender ideology and the corresponding medicalization of children, those who stood their ground against the sex-change regime in recent years often did so at great reputational and professional risk. Dr. Allan Josephson found this out the hard way.

‘Runs counter to the messages of inclusion and welcome that we have been sending.’

Josephson, a psychiatrist, joined the University of Louisville School of Medicine in 2003, where he led the Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology without incident until Josephson spoke on a Heritage Foundation panel in October 2017 titled “Gender Dysphoria in Children: Understanding the Science and the Medicine.”

Josephson — who previously expressed concerns over the medical procedures to which children experiencing so-called gender dysphoria were being subjected — explained:

Gender dysphoria is a socio-cultural, psychological phenomenon that cannot be fully addressed with drugs and surgery. Thus, doctors and others should explore what causes this confusion and help the child learn how to meet this developmental challenge.

According to court documents, the psychiatrist’s opinion apparently did not sit well with Brian Buford, the director of the university’s LGBT executive center, who contacted the medical school’s then-dean Toni Ganzel, suggesting that Josephson “might be violating the ethical standards for psychiatry” and drawing unwanted national attention for an opinion that “puts our reputation at risk and runs counter to the messages of inclusion and welcome that we have been sending.”

Ganzel, in turn, noted that Josephson’s remarks did not “reflect the culture” that the school was “trying so hard to promote,” said court documents.

The concern-mongering over Josephson’s perceived “highly conservative position” quickly snowballed. The doctor’s colleagues began hectoring him about his remarks, and by the end of the November 2017, they were pressuring him to resign as division chief for daring to express an opinion out of line with the new orthodoxy.

Under mounting pressure, Josephson agreed to resign as division head effective early December 2017. This did not, however, satisfy the ideologues in his midst who were apparently keen on institutional uniformity of vision on this issue.

Court documents indicate that officials in the school’s LGBT executive center as well as Josephson’s division colleagues plotted to undermine him, partly by challenging his “inductive reasoning as unscientific and ask how much he’s earned as an expert witness over the last two years on sexuality issues.”

‘Public universities have no business punishing professors simply because they hold different views.’

Josephson was told not to treat non-straight patients and apparently surveilled, with his conduct detailed on what one division official dubbed an “Allan tracking document.” Those colleagues who took issue with his remarks also criticized Josephson’s work performance and productivity.

By February 2019, it became clear that the school had decided not to renew the doctor’s contract. Shortly thereafter, Josephson filed suit against several university officials, alleging First Amendment retaliation.

The university fought the case all the way up to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which ruled in September that:

Josephson’s speech was constitutionally protected, as it addressed a matter of public concern; the university officials failed to demonstrate that Josephson’s “remarks had a significant disruptive effect on the Medical School’s operations”; and a reasonable jury could find that each of the defendants “retaliated against Josephson because he engaged in speech protected by the First Amendment.”

Apparently aware they were fighting a losing battle, university officials apparently agreed to pay nearly $1.6 million in damages and attorney fee to settle the lawsuit.

“After several years, free speech and common sense have scored a major victory on college campuses,” said Travis Barham, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom, the group that represented Josephson.

“As early as 2014, Dr. Josephson saw the truth behind dangerous procedures that activists were pushing on children struggling with their sex,” continued Barham. “He risked his livelihood and reputation to speak the truth boldly, and the university punished him for expressing his opinion — ultimately by dismissing him. But public universities have no business punishing professors simply because they hold different views.”

“Hopefully, other public universities will learn from this that if they violate the First Amendment, they can be held accountable, and it can be very expensive,” added Barham.

Josephson stated, “Children deserve better than life-altering procedures that mutilate their bodies and destroy their ability to lead fulfilling lives. In spite of the circumstances I suffered through with my university, I’m overwhelmed to see that my case helped lead the way for other medical practitioners to see the universal truth that altering biological sex is impossibly dangerous, while acceptance of one’s sex leads to flourishing.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​University of louisville, Louisville, Gender, Transgender, Lgbt, Gender identity, Trans, Sex change, Leftism, Psychiatry, Science, Lawsuit, Allan josephson, Politics 

Stephen A. Smith has distanced himself from Shannon Sharpe after Sharpe was hit with a $50 million lawsuit accusing him of sexual assault, battery, and emotional abuse.

Smart move on Smith’s part, says Jason Whitlock.

“Stephen A. Smith is a little bit scared. This is a bad look for him, and Stephen A. Smith has already admitted he went to Diddy parties, and Stephen A. Smith is probably cutting checks,” he says.

In a recent video, Smith responded to the allegations against Sharpe with the following:

“I also spoke to co-chairman of Disney — the boss, Jimmy Pitaro — who made it very, very clear we are taking this matter very seriously, and we are looking into this very, very closely, and once we gather as many facts as we possibly can, we will go from there. And that is all he said, and I can mention his name because I received his permission to say that. I don’t know what that means.”

Jason says Smith knows exactly what it means, which is why he’s “backpedaling.”

“A doo-doo storm is about to erupt and sweep Shannon Sharpe out,” he says, adding that he’s been looped in by certain journalists about “little leaks and other stories” that are coming down the pipeline.

“I think Stephen A. Smith knows what’s about to happen, and now he’s in full rear end kiss mode,” Jason predicts.

Not only does he think Smith is pandering to the boss, but he also thinks he might actually be happy about the lawsuit.

“Sharpe was building a YouTube channel and a career that was going to surpass Stephen A. Smith,” says Jason. “Smith wants to be a late-night talk show host. Shannon Sharpe was positioning himself to be a late-night talk show host. He’s more talented than Stephen A. Smith. Stephen A. Smith is very happy with what’s happening to Shannon Sharpe.”

That’s why he didn’t believe Smith when, in the same video, he expressed his hopes for Sharpe’s exoneration.

“In my perfect world, this equates to Jay-Z, where the case is ultimately dropped, and Shannon is allowed to continue on ‘First Take’ and continue to thrive and shine. … In my perfect world, he moves on and somehow, some way, we find this all to be false,” Smith said, adding, “But it doesn’t seem like that’s the way things are about to go down, considering who Mr. Buzbee is.”

“Stephen A. has let it slip that unless these charges are dropped, ain’t no more Shannon Sharpe on ‘First Take.’ That’s how I heard that,” says Jason.

To hear more of his analysis, watch the clip above.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Fearless, Fearless with jason whitlock, Jason whitlock, Shannon sharpe, Shannon sharpe lawsuit, Stephen a smith, Espn, Disney, Blazetv, Blaze media 

An attacker covered from head to toe in dark clothing, shoes, and a ski mask brutally attacked a screaming woman in suburban Philadelphia early Thursday morning, as surveillance video shows the suspect flattening the victim with a flying kick from behind in a parking lot outside her apartment and then stomping and punching her before running off.

Hatfield Township police said the attack — which took place as the woman was leaving her apartment around 4:30 a.m. — appears targeted, but they’re investigating all possibilities, WPVI-TV reported.

‘I couldn’t believe someone would actually do that, and it’s coming from behind … a shallow man.’

One resident in the Hatfield Village Apartments told the station his neighbor’s screams woke him up.

“I opened my blinds, and I saw my neighbor getting up,” Christopher Stevens told WPVI. “It looked like she had just been attacked.”

Stevens called 911 and showed officers his Ring video, the station added.

“It looked like he waited for her for about 10 minutes, and then when she came out to go to work, he jumped on her,” Stevens noted to WPVI, adding that “it was pretty traumatizing to see that happen to somebody. I really hope she’s okay.”

You can view a video report here; it includes the surveillance clip of the attack.

Scully Company, which manages the property, issued a statement, WPVI said: “Our thoughts and concern are with our resident, and we are hopeful for a quick recovery. Out of respect for their privacy and due to the ongoing investigation, we are unable to provide further details at this time.”

An unnamed neighbor told the station she’s “disgusted” over the attack and that “I couldn’t believe someone would actually do that, and it’s coming from behind … a shallow man.”

Kevin Finn, who has lived in the apartment complex for the last six years, told the station that the powers that be should install “camera systems, and a security patrol would probably be good.”

Police are warning residents to remain vigilant but said there’s no reason to feel at risk due to this incident, WPVI reported.

Those with information about the attack should call 215-855-0903, the station noted.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Physical attack, Suburban philadelphia, Surveillance video, Hatfield, Pennsylvania, Masked attacker, Ski mask, Dark clothing, Apartment complex, Woman attacked, Parking lot, Police investigating, Crime 

The Trump administration is working to eliminate the monetary incentive for foreign nationals to steal into the country and to pressure noncitizens presently exploiting citizen supports to wean off or get packing.

Pursuant to President Donald Trump’s Feb. 19 executive order “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders,” the U.S. Department of Agriculture is now taking steps to ensure that illegal aliens cannot get their hands on food stamps.

“President Trump has made it clear that American taxpayers will no longer subsidize illegal aliens,” USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said in a Thursday statement.

“We are stewards of taxpayer dollars, and it is our duty to ensure states confirm the identity and verify the immigration status of SNAP applicants,” continued Rollins. “USDA’s nutrition programs are intended to support the most vulnerable Americans. To allow those who broke our laws by entering the United States illegally to receive these benefits is outrageous.”

The USDA issued guidance on Thursday to state SNAP agencies nationwide setting out the minimum expectations for eligibility verification to prevent “ineligible aliens” from participating in the program.

Only American citizens and certain lawfully present noncitizens, including individuals granted asylum, are eligible for SNAP benefits. However, the U.S Government Accountability Office noted in a September 2024 report that an estimated 11.7% or $10.5 billion of SNAP benefits paid out by the USDA in fiscal year 2023 “were the wrong amount or otherwise should not have been made.”

The report indicated that “states made improper payments related to SNAP mainly because they did not verify recipients’ eligibility for program benefits.” States apparently often failed to verify whether recipients were citizens or lawfully present noncitizens.

The Center for Immigration Studies revealed in a December 2023 report that 48% of “illegal-headed households” used food welfare programs.

‘Taxpayer-funded benefits should be only for eligible taxpayers.’

As of 2022, American taxpayers were on the hook for at least $182 billion annually to provide services and benefits to illegal aliens and their dependents, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

The new USDA guidance requires state agencies to:

verify the identity of the applicant, ideally before confirming their immigration status; collect and verify Social Security numbers for all household members applying for SNAP benefits; compare SSNs to the Social Security Agency’s Death Master File database and ensure the SSN belongs to the applicant; andcheck alien applications against the Department of Homeland Security Systematic Alien Verification System for Entitlements — which DHS Secretary Kristi Noem advised governors last week is now available to states for free — to ensure eligibility.

The guidance provided other recommendations and advised state agencies that the Food and Nutrition Service “will assess the effectiveness of identity and immigration status verification practices in regular management evaluations for program compliance.”

The USDA issued the new guidance just a week after Trump issued a memo directing his administration to ensure that illegal aliens are not receiving taxpayer funds from Social Security Act programs, including Old-Age and Survivors Insurance, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

Blaze News previously reported that the memo directed the Social Security Administration to expand its fraud prosecutor programs, investigate earning reports of individuals supposedly 100 years or older with mismatched records, consider reinstating its civil monetary penalty program, and reinforce program integrity measures so only eligible foreign nationals can receive benefits.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on April 15, “These taxpayer-funded benefits should be only for eligible taxpayers.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Ebt, Food stamps, Snap, Supplemental nutrition assistance program, Usda, U.s. department of agriculture, Identity theft, Illegal aliens, Immigration, Non-citizen, Benefits, Welfare, Illegal alien, Politics 

A former judge in New Mexico and his wife were taken into custody Thursday night in connection with a suspected Tren de Aragua gangster who had apparently been living at their residence.

In fact, three young male illegal aliens from Venezuela had apparently been living in the casita behind the Las Cruces home shared by Nancy and Jose “Joel” Cano. All three Venezuelans, including 23-year-old Cristhian Ortega-Lopez, have been described by federal agents as well-known members of the vicious Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.

On February 28, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents conducted a search warrant on the Canos’ home in connection with the suspected gangsters, who were all arrested. Three days later Joel Cano, a former cop, announced his resignation as magistrate judge in Doña Ana County, an elected position he first won in 2010 as a Democrat, Blaze News previously reported.

‘There is no way in the world that I would have allowed my grandkids to have any contact with the boys if I had sensed danger.’

The New Mexico Judicial Standards Commission soon opened an investigation into Cano for possible “willful misconduct,” and Cano submitted a 23-page letter responding to the allegations. In the letter, Cano repeatedly referred to the suspected gang members as “the boys” and denied having any idea that they could be bad news.

“Let me be as crystal clear as possible,” he wrote, according to KOAT. “The very first time I ever heard that the boys could possibly have any association with Tren de Aragua was when I was informed of that by [the] agents on the day of the raid.”

Cano further insisted that if he had known, he would never have allowed “the boys” to interact with his grandchildren: “I have three grandkids that I love dearly. … There is no way in the world that I would have allowed my grandkids to have any contact with the boys if I had sensed danger.”

Cano also claimed that official documents indicated that “the boys” were not at risk of deportation. He said he repeatedly saw “this person is not subject to removal” noted on their forms and that they had asylum hearings scheduled.

Finally, the ex-judge denied other accusations related to photo and video evidence revealing that on at least one occasion, the Canos and the alleged gangbangers took a trip to the local gun range. “I did not take a single firearm to the range. I took no ammunition to the range either. [My wife] and I went only as spectators,” Cano claimed.

Nancy Cano’s daughter, April Cano, has been accused of allowing Ortega-Lopez “to hold and sometimes shoot various firearms” she owns. Prosecutors reportedly submitted photo and video evidence of Ortega-Lopez holding her weapons. Ortega-Lopez’s TDA-related tattoos are likewise allegedly visible in the photos and video.

According to reports, Nancy Cano first met Ortega-Lopez when he was living in El Paso, working construction and other odd jobs after he was released from an immigration detention facility in South Laredo because of overcrowding in December 2023. Ortega-Lopez reportedly told agents that Mrs. Cano invited him and his friends to move into the guest home on her property in Las Cruces after they had done some work for the couple.

‘Initially we came back here to arrest his wife, and as we started obviously conducting our interviews and started looking at evidence, we subsequently arrested Mr. Cano as well.’

Ortega-Lopez currently sits in the Doña Ana County Detention Center without bond, facing charges related to illegal border crossing and federal weapons violations.

And now, he and the Canos are together again. Mr. and Mrs. Cano are both likewise locked up at the Doña Ana County Detention Center without bond, facing charges of tampering with evidence, jail records show.

Jason Stevens, the Homeland Security Investigations special agent in charge of the El Paso office, gave further insights into their apprehension. “Initially we came back here to arrest his wife, and as we started obviously conducting our interviews and started looking at evidence, we subsequently arrested Mr. Cano as well,” he said, according to Newsweek.

John Fabbricatore, former ICE field office director, spoke for many when told a local news outlet: “To see that a judge would allow this to happen, it’s very concerning. It’s concerning. What else has the judge been doing?”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem responded to the news of the Canos’ arrest on social media:

Under President Trump, we have arrested over 150,000 aliens — including more than 600 members of the vicious Tren de Aragua gang.

If you are here illegally and break the law, we will hunt you down, arrest you, and lock you up.

That’s a promise.

The New Mexico Supreme Court has permanently barred Joel Cano from ever serving on the bench again.

The Canos did not respond to a request for comment from KOAT, which presumably reached out to the couple prior to their arrest.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Joel cano, Cano, Cristhian ortega-lopez, Tren de aragua, Tda, Doña ana county, Ice, Raid, Weapons, Venezuela, Illegal alien, Illegal immigrant, Politics 

President Donald Trump’s Department of Transportation replaced federal prosecutors who leaked damaging information regarding the administration’s plan to terminate New York City’s congestion toll.

On Wednesday evening, the Department of Justice lawyers accidentally — they claimed — filed in federal court a confidential memo that undermined the administration’s case.

‘It’s sad to see a premier legal organization continue to fall into such disgrace.’

The 11-page letter, dated April 11, was written by the lawyers and addressed to Sean Duffy, informing the DOT secretary that they believed their case was “exceedingly likely” to fail.

“We have been unable to identify a compelling legal argument to support this position,” they wrote.

The prosecutors recommended Duffy form a stronger argument against the Metropolitan Transit Authority, which filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration’s DOT in February for attempting to put a stop to the congestion toll.

“As discussed below, there is considerable litigation risk in defending the Secretary’s February 19, 2025 decision against plaintiffs’ claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, that the decision was contrary to law, pretextual, procedurally arbitrary and capricious, and violated due process,” the attorneys told Duffy.

The prosecutors suggested that Duffy use Office of Management and Budget regulations to argue the congestion toll should be terminated “as a matter of changed agency priorities.” They also stated that the administration could claim that the pricing was based on MTA’s funding level needs and not a goal to reduce traffic.

However, the lawyers concluded that both of these arguments were unlikely to convince the court.

Nicholas Biase, a Southern District of New York spokesperson, stated that the filing of the confidential memo “was a completely honest error and was not intentional in any way.”

Yet, the DOT questioned whether the leak was deliberate.

Halee Dobbins, a DOT spokesperson, stated, “Are SDNY lawyers on this case incompetent or was this their attempt to RESIST? At the very least, it’s legal malpractice.”

“It’s sad to see a premier legal organization continue to fall into such disgrace,” she said. “SDNY’s memo doesn’t represent reality. [New York Governor] Kathy Hochul’s congestion pricing war against the working class was hastily approved by the Biden Administration after Donald Trump was elected.”

“Taxpayers already financed the highways that Hochul is now shutting down to the driving public and there is no free alternative. This is unprecedented and illegal. If New York doesn’t shut it down, the Department of Transportation is considering halting projects and funding for the state,” Dobbins added.

The DOT replaced the attorneys with others in the DOJ’s Civil Division.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, Donald trump, Trump, Department of transportation, Dot, New york city, New york, Kathy hochul, Congestion toll, Sean duffy, Department of justice, Doj, Southern district of new york, Sdny, Politics 

There is a battle under way over the ownership and identity of the iconic ice cream brand Ben and Jerry’s — and its radical leftist founders, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, appear to be losing badly.

Earlier this month, the Wall Street Journal indicated that Cohen was trying to gather investors to buy back the brand that he and Greenfield sold to Unilever 25 years ago.

This buyback initiative came just weeks after Unilever removed the company’s anti-Trump CEO Dave Stever, allegedly on account of his commitment to Ben and Jerry’s leftist activism and despite a letter of support from Cohen and Greenfield; after years of clashes over how the ice cream company communicates its politics; and amid Unilever’s preparations to spin off its ice cream assets.

“In the year 2000, Unilever loved us for who we were,” Cohen told the Journal. “Now we’ve gone separate ways in our relationship. We just need them to set us free.”

Unilever crushed Cohen’s dream this week, indicating that Ben and Jerry’s is “not for sale,” reported Bloomberg.

“The separation and listing of ice cream is the option that we consider maximizes shareholder value; that has not changed,” Unilever CEO Fernando Fernandez said on a media call.

As of July 1, Unilever ice cream will reportedly become the Magnum Ice Cream Company and be listed in the Netherlands as a separate entity.

After tolerating decades of radioactive politics, Unilever appears keen to decontaminate Ben and Jerry’s.

‘Many states found Unilever to be in violation of their anti-boycott, divestment, and sanctions laws.’

The ice cream company has long appeared less focused on selling its sugary dessert and more focused on selling a woke political worldview. For instance, under its previous radical leadership, the company:

told Americans celebrating the Fourth of July that “it’s high time we recognize that the US exists on stolen Indigenous land and commit to returning it”;
called for the defunding of police;
opposed legislation banning men from women’s sports, preventing teachers from grooming students behind parents’ backs, keeping boys out of girls’ locker rooms, and protecting children from drag shows;
issued misleading commentary about Kyle Rittenhouse;
bemoaned the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision and advocated for looser abortion laws;
took hard anti-Israel stances;
rolled out “Pecan Resist” in 2018 — a flavor that the company said “supports groups creating a more just and equitable nation for us all, and who are fighting President Trump’s regressive agenda”; and
promoted Democratic candidates in concert with the leftist organizing outfit MoveOn Civic Action.

Ben and Jerry’s still appears to be a sugary leftist front, complaining about “white people occupy[ing] a disproportionate number of positions of power in our society,” championing non-straight activism, pushing climate alarmism, creating a coconut-flavored Kamala Harris ice cream, and pouring boatloads of money into radical causes. However, Unilever has apparently begun to suffer the effects of the ice cream company’s activism.

Unilever noted in a March legal filing that as a result of the 2021 decision by Ben and Jerry’s to halt sales of its ice cream in Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, “many states found Unilever to be in violation of their anti-boycott, divestment, and sanctions laws leading to multiple lawsuits in the United States and Israel, accusations of antisemitism, severe sanctions, and the divestment of hundreds of millions of dollars in Unilever’s stock.”

Unilever subsequently sold the company’s ice cream business in Israel to its Israeli distributor, ensuring continued sales throughout the Jewish state.

‘Business is the most powerful force in our society.’

The Journal noted that this resulted in a lawsuit as well as Unilever’s assertion that after two decades of supporting the brand’s activism, the advocacy by Ben and Jerry’s for “one-sided, highly controversial, and polarizing topics” put it, the ice cream company, and their employees at risk.

Two years after the first lawsuit, Ben and Jerry’s sued Unilever again in November, alleging its parent company tried to suppress the ice cream company’s efforts to publicly support Palestinians and criticize Israel’s war on Hamas terrorists.

“Ben & Jerry’s is a company with a soul,” Cohen told the Journal. “Business is the most powerful force in our society, and for that, it has responsibility to the society.”

With the legal battle still ongoing, Unilever — perhaps recognizing that businesses actually just have a responsibility to their shareholders — recently threatened to pull funding from the Ben and Jerry’s Foundation, reported Reuters.

Sources said to be familiar with the matter told Reuters that Unilever has conditioned continued funding — roughly $5 million a year — on the foundation agreeing to an expedited audit of its donations.

The foundation said in a statement Tuesday, “Unilever has funded the work of the foundation as a social justice organization throughout the years since the merger without any issues being raised. We are hopeful we will have the same cooperative relationship with the Magnum Ice Cream Company, the new spin-off company for Unilever’s ice cream business.”

The foundation added, “We have reached out to Unilever for clarification of news reports about the Foundation’s ongoing financial support.”

Fernandez said of the proposed foundation audit, “We have not made any threat,” reported Bloomberg.

“It is our responsibility to ensure that these funds are used properly,” said the Unilever CEO. “It has to be allocated to areas or institutions that are absolutely in line with the ones that are part of the acquisition agreement.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Business, Unilever, Icecream, Ice cream, Magnum ice cream company, Ben & jerry’s, Ben and jerrys, Ben cohen, Jerry greenfield, Politics 

Marcy Rheintgen is a transgender Florida student who was arrested and jailed for using the women’s bathroom under Florida’s anti-trans bathroom law.

The week before the arrest, Rheintgen sent around 160 letters to Florida lawmakers telling them it was his intention to use the restroom he was arrested in, in protest of the Facility Requirements Based on Sex Act.

When he arrived on the campus, two police officers met him outside the bathroom and warned him not to enter. When he did anyway, he was arrested.

“So you told them you were going to do this. It was one hundred percent a stunt, which I’m all about political stunts; I like this. And yet they still arrested you,” Alex Stein of “Prime Time with Alex Stein” says to Rheintgen.

“They trespassed me and then they arrested me, because they were like, ‘You got to be good, you got to not use the women’s bathroom in here again, you got to promise,’ and I’m like, ‘Who knows, maybe I will use the women’s bathroom’ and I was kind of a little bit sassy about it,” Rheintgen tells Stein.

“I applaud you for getting arrested,” Stein responds. “Obviously, you’re down for the cause. But isn’t this kind of stupid in the grand scheme of things?”

“I think the law is stupid that I went to jail for this. I’m protesting the punishment. You know, I spent a night in like a sticky, disgusting, scary prison with all these like MS-13 people,” Rheintgen says.

While Rheintgen is very pleased with himself for standing up for transgender rights, Stein can’t understand why he wants to be a woman in the first place.

“Why be a girl, Marcy? You’re in good shape, you seem like you’re smart, you’re politically active, you’re religious, why are you taking up this fight for the transgender community?” Stein asks.

“Well, I have always had dysphoria since I was like 6, and this is my only effective way of treating it. I was a very handsome guy, and now I’ll be a very pretty girl,” Rheintgen says. “Some people say it’s a mental illness, and they might be right, honestly.”

“You wouldn’t tell an anorexic person to continue to not eat right. I mean, wouldn’t you say that what you’re going through is a mental health issue?” Stein asks, adding, “I have mental health issues; I’m not perfect. I’m not coming here to be Mr. Judgemental. I’m not Dr. Phil.”

“It is a mental health issue, and you wouldn’t, in that application, you wouldn’t tell the person with an eating disorder to continue to not eat,” he adds.

Want more from Alex Stein?

To enjoy more of Alex’s culture jamming, comedic monologues, skits, and street segments, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Upload, Free, Video phone, Camera phone, Video, Sharing, Youtube.com, Prime time with alex stein, Prime time alex stein, Alex stein, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Marcy rheitgen, Trans bathroom bill, Anti trans bathroom bill, Florida trans laws, Transgender agenda, Lgbtqia agenda 

A video has surfaced apparently showing a Georgia high school student punching a teacher in the face, and the angry teacher fighting back — after which a brawl ensues.

WXIA-TV reported that the DeKalb County School District is addressing the video that was recorded Tuesday at Martin Luther King Jr. High School, which is in Lithonia — about 20 minutes southeast of Atlanta.

The teacher in question is on administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation, the station noted.

What took place prior to the on-camera violence isn’t clear, but the video begins with a male wearing a dark hoodie running up to a man wearing a jacket and tie by a classroom door — presumably the teacher — and punching him in the face. As you might expect, onlookers in the hallway let out an approving holler in unison.

A security guard who’s right next to the teacher puts the attacker in a bear hug and attempts to move him away, but the angry teacher hits his attacker with a punch of his own, which the crowd doesn’t like one bit.

With that, two other males — one wearing a gray hoodie and the other wearing a white hoodie — go after the teacher and knock him to the floor. By this point, the frenzied students are behaving as if they’re watching a UFC match.

The teacher gets up again, and there’s a little bit of pushing and shoving, but that’s where the 45-second clip ends. You can view it here.

What does the school district have to say?

The district said in a statement that several students reportedly initiated the physical fight with the teacher, WXIA reported, adding that three students are charged with battery and disrupting public school.

The teacher in question is on administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation, the station noted.

“The DeKalb County School District is firmly committed to maintaining learning environments free from violent behavior and will not tolerate physical altercations in our schools,” a spokesperson for the school district told WXIA.

You can view a video report here regarding the incident.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Georgia, Dekalb county, Dekalb county school district, Martin luther king jr. high school, Students physically attack teacher, Teacher fights students, Video, Students charged with battery, Investigation, Teacher on administrative leave, Violence in schools, Crime