Category: Narrative O’ The Day

And You Thought Schumer Was Upset
A mere whisper of taxpayer savings has Democrats struggling to keep their composure.

Several days after the Congressional Budget Office reported that the highly indebted United States Government ran up another trillion dollars of deficit spending in just the first five months of this fiscal year, senators are refusing to pass another spending bill without deep cuts to the federal bureaucracy. Just kidding. Democrats in the Senate are threatening to close the government unless Republicans agree to leave the bureaucracy completely undisturbed.
No, this column can’t explain the logic of that position, either. While taxpayers still yearn for some modest fiscal responsibility in Washington, the Senate minority is discussing how to prevent any of the government streamlining that voters endorsed only a few months ago.
And it was only Monday of this week when the Congressional Budget Office explained once again the size of the hole politicians are still digging with this year’s spending:

The federal budget deficit totaled $1.1 trillion in the first five months of fiscal year 2025, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. That amount is $319 billion more than the deficit recorded during the same period last fiscal year. Revenues were $37 billion (or 2 percent) higher, and outlays were $356 billion (or 13 percent) higher.

The House-passed bill does almost nothing to change this disgraceful state of the fisc, but even though Republicans have agreed to keep spending recklessly, Senate Democrats are upset about the way some of the dollars may be spent—as well as the faint possibility that a few taxpayer dollars somewhere in federal budgets may somehow not be spent at all. Terrifying, right?
In the Washington Post Theodoric Meyer, Liz Goodwin and Marianna Sotomayor report:

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-New York) is under growing pressure to unite Senate Democrats as his party agonizes — loudly and publicly — over whether to trigger a government shutdown in less than 36 hours, or side with Trump and his allies on a potentially unpopular bill.

Schumer announced Wednesday afternoon that not enough Democrats supported Republicans’ funding bill — known as a continuing resolution, or CR — to overcome a filibuster. The federal government is set to shut down at 12:01 a.m. on Saturday unless lawmakers pass a bill to keep it open, leaving Democrats in a political quandary.

“We’re in a really terrible position,” Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minnesota) said Thursday at a Politico event.

Aishah Hasnie at Fox News reports on X from outside a meeting of Democratic senators, including the junior senator from New York:

[Kirsten Gillibrand] is screaming so loud we can all hear it through the thick wood doors…Keeps yelling at her colleagues about a shutdown.

Ms. Hasnie adds:

Obviously – press who heard it believes it was [Sen. Gillibrand] based on the voice. We could not *see* her.

Ms. Hasnie and colleagues report:

Gillibrand’s office said it could not confirm she was the person screaming when reached by Fox News Digital.

That’s not a denial but perhaps we shouldn’t jump to conclusions on the identity of the backroom howler. It’s also possible that a second screamer theory could emerge.
Congressional tantrums aside, does any of this Beltway angst come close to the outrage taxpayers feel at being treated in this manner? Niall Ferguson recently observed in the Journal what happens historically to countries that allow the costs of government debt service to rise above defense spending, as has now occurred in the U.S.
From Habsburg Spain to Bourbon France to Czarist Russia and beyond, there are not a lot of happy endings.
Perhaps more screaming needs to be directed at U.S. lawmakers from outside those thick wooden doors.

 

Krugman is a perfect reverse economic barometer. He’s always been wrong

Smug Krugman Says Trump Won Because Low-Income Voters Lack ‘Sophisticated Views’ on Economics

So here’s the thing. If PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) is serious about combatting widespread public opinion that the tax-supported “news service” is a haven for elitist leftists (which is exactly what it is), trotting out the ever-smug economist, Paul Krugman isn’t the best way to go about showing it.

During a taped interview with PBS economics reporter Paul Solman, which the outlet aired on Thursday, Krugman was his usual pathetic, self-centered self throughout.

Incidentally, the former New York Time columnist has been on a years’-long crusade to find a social media app that would take down Elon Musk’s X (formerly, Twitter), and has insisted for years that President Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential election win over Democrat Hillary Clinton was “rigged.”

Solman kicked off the festivities.

For just short of 25 years, Nobel laureate economist Paul Krugman was a New York Times columnist. He began the column in the Clinton years. Krugman left The Times just before Donald Trump was inaugurated. I asked him what has changed in 25 years.

Krugman said that back in the day, he was “extremely optimistic.” But today? (emphasis, mine)

When I began writing the column, people were extremely optimistic. I was hired basically to talk about all the good news and maybe funny stuff that was happening in this glorious late 1990s economic boom. And it’s been a very troubled world since then.

[…]

Most voters have very little idea of policy. I mean, you look at the polling, ask people, do you approve of Obamacare, and it’s still pretty negative. And you ask, do you approve of the Affordable Care Act, and it’s very positive. So that’s telling you something about what voters understand about policy.

I’m unaware that most voters see the Affordable Care Act very positively, but let’s move on—with Krugman continuing to, let’s call it, “twist the truth”:

Continue reading “”

NBC Falsely Claims Magazine Disconnects Increase Safety

Around 11 people are killed each year because their handguns lacked a magazine disconnect, according to a massive 4,600-word special report by NBC News, which was released Friday.

The story’s title tells you all you need to know about the content: “A simple device could help curb accidental gun deaths, but most firearms don’t have it.”

“Since 2000, at least 277 people have been killed in gun accidents in which the shooter believed the weapon was unloaded because the magazine had been dislodged or removed, an NBC News investigation found. That total – based on federal data collected from states, as well as media reports, lawsuits and public records – is likely a significant undercount since many states only recently began reporting their data, and information on the cases may be incomplete. NBC News found 41 cases that weren’t captured in the data,” the story claims.

Most of the story focuses on those allegedly killed by a handgun that was improperly used – pointed at an innocent person and the trigger pulled.

Continue reading “”

at the last moment……

Desperate Gun Controllers Launch Astroturf ‘Hunters & Anglers for Harris’

Brady, you might recall, was called the National Council to Control Handguns when it was formed 50 years ago. In 1980 it changed its name to Handgun Control, Inc. and partnered with the National Coalition to Ban Handguns in an attempt to enact handgun bans at the local, state, and eventually, national level.

It’s a sign of how much progress Second Amendment supporters have made over the decades that groups like Brady now try to pretend they ever advocated for a complete ban on handguns, and “proudly support” professed gun owners like Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. But while their stated goals may have shifted over the years, Brady only seems to be okay with gun ownership when it might help their favored candidates win election.

Which brings us to Hunters and Anglers for Harris-Walz. If you visit the astroturf group’s website, you’ll immediately notice a few oddities. Who’s in charge of the group? There’s no way to tell. What policies does the organization support? They don’t say. There are only three links on the website; one to make a donation, one to shop at the Harris-Walz campaign store, and the last to “add your name in support”. When you click on the third link, you’re taken to a page where you’re asked to give your name, phone number, and address as well as the opportunity to sign an “Open Letter from Hunters and Anglers for Harris-Walz” that doesn’t mention the Second Amendment at all. 

Friends – 

As hunters, anglers, and stewards of America’s natural resources, we understand the deep connection between the land, the water, and our way of life. We know that preserving the beauty and bounty of our outdoors is essential not just for us, but for future generations of sportsmen and sportswomen.

Kamala Harris has consistently demonstrated a strong commitment to conserving our landscapes, recognizing the critical role it plays in our nation’s well-being. Her work to protect our public lands, combat climate change, and promote clean energy while balancing the needs for wildlife reflects her dedication to ensuring that the outdoor experiences we cherish remain accessible and sustainable for all Americans. As Vice President, Kamala Harris helped open an additional 2 million acres of public land for hunting and fishing.

Tim Walz, as a lifelong hunter, and angler, has spent more time in the field than anyone running on a presidential ticket since Teddy Roosevelt. In Congress, he was a dedicated member of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation and remains a tireless advocate for conservation and the outdoor traditions we hold dear. His leadership in preserving hunting and fishing rights, promoting habitat conservation and restoration, and supporting responsible wildlife management underscores his commitment to our community.      

Together, Harris and Walz offer a vision of America that honors our outdoor heritage while addressing the conservation challenges that will determine the future of hunting and angling in America. They understand that our lands and waters are not just resources to be used, but treasures to be protected and enjoyed by all.

Join us in supporting Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Let’s ensure that our outdoor traditions thrive for generations to come.

At the very bottom of the page, in tiny print, there’s a brief note: This form was created inside of Forge Advisors DC.

Forge Advisors is a consulting firm located in the D.C. suburb of Reston, Virginia founded by Brittney Killen in 2017 that appears to have multiple contracts with government agencies, defense contractors, and some commercial clients as well, but no obvious connection to any hunting or outdoor organizations.

Hunters and Anglers for Harris-Walz appears to be nothing more than a way for Democrats to gather information from potential voters so they can spam them with get-out-the-vote messaging between now and Election Day. The complete lack of any details on the organization’s leadership is suspect. Even previous astroturf attempts like the American Hunters and Shooters Association had a human face to go along with their effort to deflect attention away from Barack Obama’s past support for semi-auto bans, gun rationing laws, and other anti-2A efforts. Hunters and Anglers for Harris-Walz apparently couldn’t even find a token Democrat gun owner to serve as the front-facing head of the outfit, which is just downright embarrassing for them. 

Even for an astroturf outfit this is pretty lazy work. I don’t know how many voters will be suckered into providing their information to the Harris/Walz campaign via the website’s open letter, but I’m confident that the vast majority of hunters, anglers, and gun owners will pay no mind to this pathetic attempt at outreach between now and election day

BLUF
It has always been a scam about money to say the science is settled. It is as factual as the lie about having to stay six feet apart to protect against COVID

CNN fearmongers about Antarctica greening at an ‘alarming’ rate

A new “climate change” article from CNN, like all the continuous articles on the weather, storms, or warming, is meant to scare people into capitulating into completely changing their way of life. The media just regurgitates what they are told without asking questions or doing research, pushing the green agenda to confiscate more money and power for the government. Our freedom and prosperity are at risk because of this agenda.

Here are some excerpts from the article and comments:

Parts of icy Antarctica are turning green with plant life at an alarming rate as the region is gripped by extreme heat events, according to new research, sparking concerns about the changing landscape on this vast continent.

Scientists used satellite imagery and data to analyze vegetation levels on the Antarctic Peninsula, a long mountain chain that points north to the tip of South America, and which has been warming much faster than the global average.

They found plant life — mostly mosses — had increased in this harsh environment more than 10-fold over the past four decades, according to the study by scientists at the universities of Exeter and Hertfordshire in England, and the British Antarctic Survey, published Friday in the journal Nature Geoscience.

Plant life increased 10 fold over forty years. That sounds like a lot doesn’t it? But, in reality, it increased from .4 square miles to 5 square miles.

Vegetation covered less than 0.4 square miles of the Antarctic Peninsula in 1986 but had reached almost 5 square miles by 2021, the study found. The rate at which the region has been greening over nearly four decades has also been speeding up, accelerating by more than 30% between 2016 and 2021.

For reference, Antarctica is 5.5 million square miles and the Antarctic Peninsula is 202,000 square miles; in other words, five square miles is .00002% of the 202,000 total square miles. Be very afraid!

Continue reading “”

Deer hunting causes gun violence, researchers claim
Researchers admit their data was flawed, use it anyway.

In what may be the most poorly conceived and horribly researched study ever published by The Journal of the American Medical Association during its entire 141-year history, a trio of anti-gun researchers now claims deer hunting is associated with a substantial increase in firearm violence.

To arrive at their laughable conclusion, the authors used data from the infamous Gun Violence Archive, which has been debunked dozens of times and is well known for its shoddy research and biased statistics.

Even the authors admitted there were problems with the GVA data. “Our study relies on shooting data from a single source, the GVA. Data from GVA have been shown to have a bias toward incidents that receive more media attention and do not include comprehensive counts of firearm suicides,” the report states.

Despite these inherent biases, the researchers used the GVA data anyway. They didn’t allow the facts to interfere with their preconceived and biased narrative.

The report, “Deer Hunting Season and Firearm Violence in US Rural Counties,” which was released Wednesday, was written by Patrick Sharkey, PhD; Juan Camilo Cristancho, BA, and Daniel Semenza, PhD.

Sharkey is affiliated with Princeton University’s School of Public and International Affairs. Cristancho works at the University of California, Irvine’s School of Education, and Semenza is affiliated with the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers University.

The researchers sought to investigate “the association between the start of deer hunting season and shootings in rural counties of the US.”

They compared shootings during the first three weeks of deer season to a week prior to the season opener. The authors claim there was a “substantial increase in shootings” during the start of deer season, which they said calls for additional gun control, of course.

“The findings highlight the role of firearm prevalence in gun violence and suggest the need for focused policies designed to reduce firearm violence in areas with substantial hunting activity during the first weeks of deer hunting season,” the report states.

About the author

Patrick Sharkey, PhD, led the research team.

“Dr. Sharkey had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis,” his report claims.

According to his Princeton bio, Sharkey’s research focuses on “urban inequality, violence, and public policy.” He is also the creator of AmericanViolence.org, a website that claims it provides “comprehensive, updated data on violence from as many of the largest 100 largest U.S. cities as possible.”

AmericanViolence.org, like Sharkey’s recent study, relies upon debunked data. “In the latest iteration of the site we have drawn more heavily on data on fatal and nonfatal shootings published by the Gun Violence Archive, an excellent resource that has tracked all forms of gun violence in the United States over time,” the website states.

Continue reading “”

Biden Didn’t Tell Us Why He Withdrew From Presidential Race
It was a short State of the Union, I guess.

President Joe Biden didn’t tell us why he withdrew from the presidential race in his speech he said he would explain why he withdrew.

It was a 10-minute State of the Union.

Look, I would truly believe nothing happened behind closed doors, and no “soft coup” would have happened if Biden had stuck to his word that he would be a “transitional” president and only served one term.

But Biden didn’t! It’s insane. Biden even sounded mean at times when he asserted he would stay in the race.

The speech left us with even more questions. We end every single day with more questions than answers.

The left will point to this part to prove Biden explained why he dropped out:

BIDEN: “A cause of American democracy itself. We must unite to protect it. You know, in recent weeks it’s become clear to me that I need to unite my party in this critical endeavor.

I believe, my record as president, my leadership in the world, my vision for America’s future, all merited a second term, but nothing, nothing can come in the way of saving our democracy. That includes personal ambition.

So I’ve decided the best way forward is to pass the torch to a new generation. It’s the best way to unite our nation.”

So, Biden has to drop out because his record is so good? His record is so good that the only way to unite everyone is for him to drop out.

The most popular, noble, and spectacular president ever just has to pass the torch to a new generation.

Um, what? That makes no sense. That does not explain why he had to drop out.

Again, we have more questions.

Speech

So how about the speech? So many lies.

The biggest lie? America is not involved in any war across the world.

Except..we are. We don’t have boots on the ground in Ukraine, but Biden has sent so much money and weapons to Ukraine.

We are in a proxy war with Russia due to the support we’ve given Ukraine.

Secured the border? Biden’s administration has not done that at all.

Narrative: Anti-gunners seek safety; pro-gunners care only about rights. Wrong!

Far too often when a media outlet reports on “gun violence,” the undertone in the article favors the viewpoint of gun grabbers, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

It’s the same basic premise in most news stories: A shooting somewhere prompts anti-gun legislators to pass “commonsense gun control,” but pro-gun lawmakers are simply not interested in passing “gun safety” reform because, well, rights are more important than safety.

The authors often even cite the misleading statistics promulgated by Everytown for Gun Safety or Brady United — both staunch gun-grabbing organizations.

Such was the case again with a story about House Bill 433, the ban on so-called “mass casualty weapons” that, if passed, would result in making nearly all semi-automatic handguns and rifles illegal in Ohio. Fortunately, that bill likely will go nowhere. Another recent example was a story on passing “safe storage” laws.

Speaking of legislation: BFA testifies in favor of SB 32, Sen. Shaffer’s bill to provide civil immunity

What’s getting in the way? According to the typical narrative, it’s extremism. What they’re saying, of course, is that we gun-rights advocates are installing too many pro-gun extremist Ohio legislators who put rights above safety and cater to the evil gun lobby.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
As stated, the policy recommendations presented by the authors are merely longstanding goals of the gun-ban industry, which would help propel them toward their ultimate goal of total civilian disarmament. The only difference is that now their policy recommendations are presented as necessary to “address the dangers of armed insurrectionism.”

Johns Hopkins: More Gun Control Needed to Prevent Second Civil War

By Lee Williams

A recent report by the Center for Gun Violence Solutions, which is part of Johns Hopkins (Michael) Bloomberg School of Public Health, conflates private gun ownership with armed insurrection in order to advocate for expanded gun control.

The 32-page study, which is titled “Defending Democracy: Addressing the Danger of Armed Insurrection,” not only revisits and revises the Jan. 6th protest — even though no protesters were armed and the only casualty was 35-year-old Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, who was shot and killed by Capitol Police — it resurrects actual armed insurrections from American history, such as Shays’ Rebellion of 1786, the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 and the American Civil War.

The three authors, who are all attorneys with a history of paid anti-gun activism, clumsily raise the insurrection boogeyman to push for additional regulations for carrying firearms, tactical training prohibitions, additional gun-free zones, expanded Red Flag laws and the repeal of state preemption statutes, which has long been a major goal of the gun ban industry. Preemption laws prevent local jurisdictions from enacting their own gun-control regulations, which would result in a patchwork of gun-free zones.

Their authors’ warped message is to be expected, especially when you consider the biased nature of their backgrounds, their sponsors, their sources and Michael Bloomberg’s school itself. (If you type “gun violence” into the school’s internal search engine it will yield more than 1,000 results.)

Continue reading “”

It’s Almost as if Giffords’ Standard for ‘Gun Safety’ Has Nothing to Do With Actually Keeping People Safe.

How do you clowns seriously argue that a state like Idaho, with its 2022 homicide rate of 2.0 per 100,000 people, less than half of what California has, is “failing at protecting [its] communities”? Seems like it is doing a pretty damn good job at keeping people safe overall.

It kinda seems like your standard for “safety” is “do what we say”, not the actual results. That’s why you give violent hellholes like Illinois and Maryland high grades despite their horrid results. They didn’t actually solve anything, but they pass what you demand!

Yes, the southern states also do terribly, but they also had sky-high homicide rates when their gun laws were much stricter.

Rolling Stone Blames Gun Industry For Mass Shootings – Reveals Greater Fear Of Patriot Rebellion

It’s the old leftist anti-gun standby:  Pretend as if the 2nd Amendment was drafted only to protect hunting and self defense against criminals.  Ignore the fact that the Founding Fathers explicitly created gun rights for the purpose of repelling and overthrowing a corrupt government.  Pretend as if Americans are not supposed to have access to military grade weapons when that is exactly what the 2nd Amendment was enshrined to protect.

Under the Constitution, the American militia was intended to act as the defense force for the nation.  And, the militia was made up of every able bodied male citizen.  The militia was the military (in a sense), and the militia had access to all the weapons needed to fulfill their role.  This included repeating rifles (automatic rifles), cannons, explosives and even naval ships in private hands.  The Founders never intended for a standing military to exist, nor did they ever intend for a standing military to act as a proxy in place of an armed citizenry.

As James Madison noted:

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.”    
– James Madison, January 29, 1788, Federalist No. 46     

And, as George Mason asserted:

“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”
– George Mason, June 4, 1788, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention

It should be treated as a revealing condition that the establishment and corporate media consistently attack the civilian ownership of guns which they argue are “made for war.”  These guns which they refer to as “assault rifles” (because it sounds scary) are used in less than 3% of all gun crimes in the US.  They are also a small percentage of overall mass shootings in the US, yet they garner almost 100% of the anti-gun lobby’s attention.

Continue reading “”

Next Gun Control Fight Likely to Target Ammo

Over the weekend the New York Times ran a lengthy story on the Lake City Army Ammunition Plant and its role in producing ammunition for the civilian market in addition to the U.S. military. The Times report explicitly tied ammo produced at Lake City to mass shootings, with the paper reporting that Lake City ammunition has been “bought by murderers, antigovernment groups, and others.”

Not just to complain about, but potentially to legislate or regulate as well. I’ve been covering 2A issues long enough to recognize the pattern here; a major media outlet “uncovers” something it portrays as a problem, and then anti-gun politicians and gun control groups start demanding action be taken. The New York Times report itself doesn’t contain too many comments from anti-2A activists, but it doesn’t need to. That’s what follow up stories are for. Instead, the purpose of the initial report is to establish some reason to be concerned; in this case, the presence of Lake City-produced ammunition turning up at crime scenes.

Continue reading “”

Biden campaign co-chair uses gun control to deflect

In the past, we’ve seen a couple of politicians get themselves out of some hot water by declaring an intention to focus on pushing gun control.

They make the announcement and the controversy around them seems to evaporate almost overnight.

That doesn’t work so much for President Joe Biden.

After all, this isn’t exactly a new push from him.

However, that isn’t going to stop his campaign co-chair from trying to use the tactic to deflect questions about his age.

President Biden‘s 2024 campaign co-chair CedricRichmond pivoted to talk about gun control when asked Sunday about the 80-year-old president’s age presenting challenges at the ballot box.

“While they continue to talk about age, we’ll continue to talk about the fact that they’re not talking about banning assault weapons, while they’re banning books but they’re not protecting our children in schools,” Mr. Richmond said on ABC’s “This Week.” “The fact that none of them raised their hand to talk about climate as a real issue when we see fires in Maui, we see hurricanes hitting California, we see the destruction of wildfires. But they’re not talking about that.”

So, as you can see, it’s not just gun control that Richmond tried to invoke to stave off criticism that Biden might just be too old to do the job.

Of course, the truth of the matter is that so-called assault weapons is something very different than the president’s age.

A new assault weapon ban isn’t really going to happen, in part because enough people understand that the issue with mass shootings isn’t because of AR-15s but with people who seem to think killing people wholesale sounds like a swell time.

In contrast, the books being “banned,” in many cases actually aren’t being banned, they’re simply being removed from curriculums or, if they are being removed, there’s a good reason. I’ve seen pages from a couple of notable examples that were pretty sexually explicit, after all.

Meanwhile, we have a president who can barely piece together two coherent sentences as a general rule, who seemingly falls asleep during important events, and who can’t seem to remember that his one son died of cancer rather than being killed in Iraq.

Granted, that last may just be a case of lying, but I’m not sure that makes anything better.

Bringing up his age is certainly valid, and even 69 percent of Democrats think he’s too old.

So why try to pivot to gun control? Because, frankly, that’s all the Biden campaign has at this point. They need to deflect from the very real concern over Biden’s mental faculties. When more than two-thirds of his own party think he’s too old to do the job, there’s a huge problem and they know it.

But they’re hoping the media will focus on the gun control angle instead because it worked with former Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam and his blackface controversy and with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his brownface controversy.

Both declared they would push for gun control and all was forgiven.

With Biden, though, there’s no reason to think he can step up any anti-gun efforts, that he could get them through Congress even if he did, or that with his age being what it is, he’d remember anyway.

That doesn’t mean the media won’t try, but they won’t make those concerns disappear by pretending they don’t exist.

You might call the time when a boys under 15 year old high school soccer team beat the women’s national team  an indication this is true, but facts don’t matter when the narrative must go on.

Coach fired for saying biological men can outperform women in sports

A high school snowboarding coach has filed a lawsuit against his former employers alleging that he was fired for basically telling students in a conversation that men can outperform women in sports.

Coach David Bloch filed the lawsuit against the leaders of Woodstock Union High School in July demanding he be reinstated. An attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative firm that represents Bloch, said a hearing on the lawsuit is expected to take place in early September.

The federal lawsuit, filed in Vermont, states that Bloch was wrongly accused of violating the school district’s harassment and bullying policy for referencing a student “in a manner that questioned the legitimacy and appropriateness of [a] student competing on the girls’ team.”

Windsor Central Supervisory Union officials did not respond to The College Fix’s requests for comment over the past two weeks.

Bloch founded Woodstock High School’s snowboarding team over a decade ago and has served as its head coach ever since, according to the lawsuit, focused on the intersection of biological differences between genders and the right to speak on controversial topics.

According to an Alliance Defending Freedom news release, the controversial, three-minute conversation occurred in February when Bloch’s team competed against another team that had a biological male who identifies as a female that competes in the female division.

“Before the competition, Coach Bloch overheard two of his student-athletes having a discussion about that male competing against females, and he stepped into the conversation,” stated the news release from the alliance.

“Coach Bloch said that people can express themselves differently and that there can be masculine women and feminine men. But he also acknowledged the biological reality that males and females have different DNA, and he shared his belief that the physical differences between men and women give men an athletic advantage,” it stated.

Bloch’s attorneys allege the coach never referred to the transgender athlete by name and the competition took place without incident. However, the next day, Bloch was informed of his “immediate termination,” his attorneys stated.

The lawsuit alleges the superintendent who fired Bloch “has a child who identifies as transgender.”

According to Matthew Hoffman, legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, Bloch’s dismissal raises concerns about his rights to due process and free speech.

“He received no notice of the allegations against him and was not given an opportunity to defend himself before being fired,” Hoffman said in a telephone interview with The College Fix, adding this raises serious questions about the thoroughness of the investigation conducted by the school district.

The lawsuit also argues the school district’s harassment and bullying policies are unconstitutionally vague “because they grant government officials unbridled discretion in deciding what constitutes ‘gender identity,’ ‘harassment,’ and ‘harassment on the basis of gender identity,’” as well as “because they utilize terms that are inherently subjective and elude any precise or objective definition that would be consistent from one administrator, teacher, or student to another.”

In addition to reinstatement, the lawsuit demands the school district acknowledge his termination violated his First Amendment rights to free speech.

Hoffman added that he hopes this incident will lead to changes in policies to prevent similar occurrences, emphasizing that speaking out on controversial topics should not result in the loss of one’s job. He also called for greater protection of employees’ rights to express their opinions.

Bloch is a Roman Catholic “who believes that God creates human beings as male and female. Consistent with his faith—and with scientific evidence—he believes that chromosomes determine a person’s sex,” the ADF news release stated.

Hoffman said that despite the difficult circumstance Bloch is in, many students and community members have privately shared their support with him.