Loading summary
Transcript19 lines
- [00:00]
A
This is an iHeart podcast, Guaranteed Human. There's a difference between liking a house and actually getting it. Redfin is built to make up that difference and close the gap between finding and owning the home for you. Redfin agents close twice as many deals as other agents, so when you find a home you love, you're not a step behind when it comes to making an offer. That means less watching great homes disappear and more focus on the one you'll call home. Redfin helps turn saved listings into real addresses. The get started@redfin.com, own the dream.
- [00:35]
B
Bettering your business takes working with the best.
- [00:38]
A
With the James Hardy alliance, you gain access to leads, training, networking, and support from the number one brand of siding in North America. Achieve new levels of success by joining the James Hardy alliance today.
- [00:51]
B
You know Roald Dahl, he thought of Willy Wonka and the bfg. But did you know he was a spy? In the new podcast the Secret World of Roald Dahl, I'll tell you that story and much, much more.
- [01:03]
A
What?
- [01:04]
B
You probably won't believe it either.
- [01:05]
A
Was this before he wrote his stories? It must have been okay, I don't think that's true.
- [01:10]
B
I'm telling you, the guy was a spy. Listen to the Secret World of Roald Dahl on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [01:20]
A
Then she says, have you seen a photo of my son? And I'm like, who is this person? Welcome to the boys and Girls podcast. Arranged marriage is basically a reality show and you're auditioning for your soul. Who's judging? Only your entire family. I sacrificed myself to this ancient tradition hoping to find love the right way, and instead I found chaos, comedy and a lot of cringe. Listen to boys and Girls on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The past few weeks, my social media feeds have been more apocalyptic than usual, oddly enough. Not due to the escalating war with Iran, the shell shocked economy, or oil prices, but because of a wave of posts and news articles proclaiming impending doom for trans people in the United States. Attacks on trans rights are obviously not new and have steadily risen the past 10 years. But this recent collection of worrying claims are especially grim or outright genocidal. Just this month I've seen viral posts citing online articles saying that ICE is going to round up and quote unquote disappear trans people, that the FDA is making a quote unquote registry of trans women, and that an adult trans health care ban is imminent. Welcome to it could happen here. A show about things falling apart. I'm Garrison Davis. For this episode, I'd like to emphasize the could in it could happen here. It's not it will definitely happen here and there's nothing you can do to stop it. These panic inducing claims and the articles they're sourced from are referring to real things or movements happening in either right wing activism or anti trans policy and legislation, but are framed in a way to maximize catastrophe rather than actually understanding what's happening at the moment and what we can do about it. Left unchecked panic clickbait reduces the process of staying informed to being in a state of constant doom and feeling hopeless against an unstoppable enemy. Or it makes someone completely check out and not believe anything they see online, even if there is a real pressing threat, both of which cloud our ability to assess and respond to very real threats. For the bulk of this episode, I'm going to focus on an article that claims ICE is now permitted to detain anyone for, quote unquote looking talking trans. This reporting and the online discussion around it is a microcosmatic example of how we understand both the Trump administration's attacks on trans people and how and why ICE operates as an agency. This story can be traced to a substack post with the headline Trump Administration Opens the door for ICE to target anyone Suspected of being Trans. The sub headline continues by reading quote, under a new rule, the State Department will be able to revoke trans people's visas over, quote, unquote misrepresentation. It'll give ICE grounds to suspect all trans people of being in the US Illegally. Unquote the information contained in this headline is the furthest many people will engage with the content of this article. Combining that headline with preconceived notions about how ICE functions under the second Trump administration makes this a very frightening claim. So what evidence does the substack article include to support this claim? Earlier this month, the State Department updated its policy for the diversity immigrant visa program, also known as the Green Card lottery. The new rules require that applicants upload a scan of their foreign passport's biographic and signature page to cut down on fraudulent diversity visa program entries. The policy update also changed the gender entry to sex on application forms. In the policy rule update, the State Department wrote, the marker reflected in the sex field on any visa application, including the entry form, should match the applicant's biological sex at birth, even if that differs from the sex listed on the applicant's foreign passport or other identifying documentation. Unquote the substack article claims this could force a, quote, mismatch between trans people's applications and their passports, something it can then use to declare their applications fraudulent and disqualify them entirely, unquote. The first half of that sentence is true. A mismatch may occur between the gender listed on foreign documents and the sex the US Government wants you to list on a visa application. But it is simply not the case that this mismatch will inevitably result in an application being deemed fraudulent and then denied. The kind of fraud this rule change is trying to combat by requiring a passport scan is not unique to trans people, according to Melita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU's LGBTQ and HIV Rights Project. Picasso said in an email that the new rule, quote, seems to more directly target fraudulent activities involving third parties, basically entering the lottery on behalf of individuals without their knowledge and consent and then extorting them for large amounts of money if they are selected, unquote. The stipulation requiring an applicant to list their biological sex at birth on forms has actually already been State Department policy for both immigrant and non immigrant visa applications for over a year, effectively since Trump's executive order mandating the US Government officially recognized two biological sexes which are determined at birth and that, quote, government issued identity documents, including visas and all forms that require an individual's sex shall accurately reflect an individual's immutable biological classification as either male or female, unquote. There's just no basis for the claim that a mismatch between the gender listed on a foreign document and and the sex marked on application forms will itself, quote, unquote disqualify someone from receiving a visa. ACLU staff attorney Melita Picasso told me that the new policy itself recognizes this could cause discrepancies, and that she doesn't see a, quote, new or heightened risk of being accused of fraud or willful misrepresentation if a transgender person follows the instructions by listing their sex assigned at birth on the application, even if they also file a birth certificate that has been updated to reflect their gender identity, unquote. The State Department has been aware for a while that this kind of policy will create these kinds of mismatches. A February 2025 State Department memo reads. Quote, there may be instances when a consular officer becomes aware that the sex listed on the foreign passport may not be the applicant's sex as defined in the executive order. In such cases, the adjudicator should confirm the applicant's sex as defined in the executive order, indicate that sex on the visa, and add a case note documenting any discrepancy between the passport and the visa to prevent issues at the port of entry, unquote later In April of 2025, the United States Citizenship Immigration Services officially updated their policy on requiring, quote, unquote, biological sex on immigration applications. The policy also states that, quote, USCIS does not deny any immigration benefits solely based on a failure to properly indicate the benefit requesters sex, unquote ACLU staff attorney Melita Picasso told me that USCIS officials have, quote, unquote, a lot of discretion and that the policy says that failure to list biological sex, quote, will cause delays in processing the application while USCIS tries to verify your sex assigned at birth, unquote. Now, the State Department has said there are grounds to deny visa applications for trans people if they make a, quote, willful affirmative material act of misrepresentation by misrepresenting their, quote, unquote biological sex at birth in application forms or to a consular officer to gain entry to the United States under false pretenses. Legally qualifying as willful misrepresentation is a relatively high bar, and this language was specifically written with the intent to restrict trans athletes from entering the country to play sports. The sort of misrepresentation the State Department is talking about is if a trans woman, quote, unquote, misrepresents her birth sex to procure a visa or admission into the United States for the purpose of competing in a women's sports competition. This same sports related memo, dated February 24, 2025, also states, quote, if there is a discrepancy either in the applicant's documents or in electronic consular records, or if other evidence casts reasonable doubt on the applicant's sex, you should refuse the case under 221G and request additional evidence to demonstrate sex at birth, unquote. Section 221g of the Immigration and Nationality act is a temporary visa refusal pending further documents or information provided by the applicant. For an athlete visa, the bar is very high and the burden is on the applicant to prove they have the special and rare qualities required to be eligible for a visa. But the substack article doesn't just claim that being trans could disqualify you from receiving a visa. The article escalates its claims, stating that trans people who already have a valid visa could have it revoked and be deported for misrepresenting their sex in the past, citing US Law that if an alien is found to have obtained a visa, quote, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, they are ineligible to be in the United States. The article also refers to a section of the Foreign Affairs Manual which includes providing, quote, a fake birth certificate in support of an immigrant visa application as misrepresenting a material fact, unquote. The article goes on to assert that the Trump administration could refuse to recognize trans people's amended birth certificates from foreign countries and essentially consider them, quote, unquote fake, thus making their visa eligible to be revoked by, quote, unquote misrepresenting a material fact. The author of the substack links to another one of her own articles on a new policy regarding the issuing of US Passports with sex markers reflecting biological sex at birth. The passport policy instructs State Department employees to check birth certificates for signs of being amended and if they are amended, request more documents that list sex at the time of birth, such as medical records, hospital records, or early school records. ACLU staff attorney Picasso says that this does not mean entire amended birth certificates are quote, unquote fake for the purposes of establishing fraud or willful misrepresentation, which is again a high bar, and the Trump administration has never argued this as such. Quote I think it's dangerous to even suggest that a legally obtained and valid birth certificate could be viewed as quote, unquote fake without a much clearer statement from the federal government to that effect, picasso advised. In Trump's recent travel bans, they have specifically mentioned the availability of fabricated birth certificates in certain countries, and this whole claim about trans people's visas being revoked because of applications of misrepresentation is contradicted by the State Department, which said last year, quote, currently valid US Visas issued prior to the effective date of this guidance bearing a sex that differs from the visa holders sex as defined in the Executive Order will remain valid through its expiration date. The visa holder does not need to apply for a new visa with an amended sex marker until the current visa expires, unquote. So the first half of this article covers what I argue are gross misrepresentations of State Department visa policy. The second half of the article speculates on how this misrepresentation could be enforced by ice. In a Supreme Court ruling last year, Justice Kavanaugh wrote that ICE could detain people based on a combination of factors such as working, a certain kind of job, ethnicity, and speaking Spanish or talking with an accent. Kavanaugh said that ICE can detain someone for questioning, quote, if they have a reasonable suspicion based on specific articulable facts that the person being questioned is an alien illegally in the United States. The author of the substack article argued that Kavanaugh's concurrence, quote unquote effectively permitted ICE to use the fact that someone looks trans as the quote specific articulable fact, allowing its officers to question, harass, detain, and even deport both citizens and non citizens as long as it has a reason to claim that being trans makes a person more likely to be in the US illegally. Unquote with this substacker adding that because of State Department policy requiring applicants to list biological sex at birth on forms, quote, ICE now have the enforcement rationale to assert that trans people are more likely than CIS people to have misrepresented themselves during the visa process and therefore are more likely to have entered the country unlawfully, unquote. This assertion from the substacker rests on the idea that looking trans makes someone more likely to be in the US Illegally. This idea is not supported by any immigration policy memo or guideline. It also assumes that the justification for a Kavanaugh stop is the same as the legal process of removal, which it is not. This idea was invented by the author of this article, not based on any enforcement directive from ICE and misrepresents what the State Department means by intentionally misrepresenting biological sex in the visa application process. Discrepancies in gender markers across government documents is not itself grounds for detention or deportation. In fact, it's federal policy to create such discrepancies. Furthermore, dealing with potential discrepancies between gender markers on foreign documents and the Trump Admin's insistence on only using biological sex at birth on photo documents is handled by State Department consular officers and U.S. cIS employees, not ICE enforcement and Removal operations officers who work under an entirely different agency. But the main thing that makes me believe that ICE will not suddenly start targeting people for being trans is that this State Department policy requiring sex at birth on visa applications isn't actually new. It's existed in some form since February 2025 for both immigrant and non immigrant visas. The only recent change is that the green card lottery rules have been updated to use the same language. Quote Nothing about this new rule makes it more or less likely that ICE will be free to scrutinize trans people's documents and detain those whose documents show any inconsistencies, unquote Affirmed ACLU staff attorney Melita Picasso Put plainly, State Department restrictions on stating assigned sex at birth on green card or visa applications does not give ICE any new justification to roam around disappearing random people who, quote unquote look trans. But it could make border crossings more risky for non citizens and visa applications, harder to navigate and subject to delays. This policy from the State Department is bad, but turning that into saying that ICE is now going to round up trans people and V code them doesn't understand how this will actually affect immigrant trans people or trans people currently in federal custody. Side note, V coding refers to this systematic enabling of sexual abuse towards incarcerated trans women to please male prisoners. Near the end of the substack article, the author suggests that trans people in Kansas could be at extra risk of getting detained by DICE because of a new law invalidating driver's license and birth certificates with amended gender markers, possibly leaving some US Citizens temporarily unable to prove citizenship with a valid birth certificate. This new law is certainly dangerous and any attempt to strip away people's legal ID is very worrying and carries potential for abuse. In the case of Kansas already, having a passport would be really ideal. Otherwise, a hospital birth certificate or early school records can theoretically be used to help prove citizenship. And it is worth saying that a citizen temporarily losing documentation does not put them at the same level of marginalized risk as an undocumented immigrant. The new Kansas law does direct the Office of Vital Statistics to, quote, reissue birth certificates when necessary to correct this sex identification, unquote. Similarly, DMVs were instructed to reissue a, quote, unquote corrected license once the invalidated one was turned in. We'll be right back after these messages.
- [19:24]
B
Bettering your business takes working with the best.
- [19:27]
A
With the James Hardy alliance, you gain access to leads, training, networking, and support from the number one brand of siding in North America. Achieve new levels of success by joining the James Hardy alliance today.
- [19:39]
B
You know Roald Dahl, the writer who thought up Willy Wonka, Matilda and the bfg. But did you know he was also a spy?
- [19:46]
A
Was this before he wrote his stories? It must have been.
- [19:49]
B
Our new podcast series, the Secret World of Roald Dahl is a wild journey through the hidden chapters of his extraordinary, controversial life. His job was literally to seduce the wives of powerful Americans.
- [20:00]
A
What?
- [20:00]
B
And he was really good at it. You probably won't believe it either.
- [20:03]
A
Okay, I don't think that's true.
- [20:05]
B
I'm telling you, the guy was a spy. Did you know Dahl got cozy with the Roosevelts, played poker with Harry Truman, and had a long affair with a congresswoman. And then he took his talents to Hollywood, where he worked alongside Walt Disney and Alfred Hitchcock before writing a hit James Bond film. How did the Secret Agent wind up as the most successful children's author ever? And what darkness from his covert past seeped into the stories we read as kids. The true story is stranger than anything he ever wrote. Listen to the Secret World of Roald Dahl on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [20:39]
A
I went and sat on the little ottoman in front of him. Hi dad. And just when I said that, my mom comes out of the kitchen. She says, I have some cookies and milk. This is badass, convict, right? Just finished five years. I'm going to have cookies and milk at Mom. Yeah. On the CENO Show Podcast, each episode invites you into a raw, unfiltered conversations about recovery, resilience and redemption. On a recent episode, I sit down with actor cultural icon Danny Trail talk about addiction, transformation and the power of second chances. The entire season two is now available to binge, featuring powerful conversations with guests like Tiffany, Adish, Johnny Knoxville and more. I'm an alcoholic and without this trope, I'm gonna die. Open your free iHeartRadio app, search the Cino show and listen now. A ambitious, well intentioned, ferocious and wealthy mother looks like in the black community this Women's History Month. The podcast Keep It Positive Sweetie celebrates the power women choosing healing, purpose and faith. Even when life gets messy, love is not a destination. You have to work on it every day. Keep It Positive Sweetie creates space for honest conversations on self worth, love, growth and navigating life with grace and grit, led by women who uplift, inspire and tell the truth out loud. I have several conversations with God and I know why it took 20 years to hear these and more. Listen to Keep It Pies a sweetie on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back to It Could Happen Here. The unsubstantiated claims made in that substack article went viral across multiple social media platforms like TikTok, Blue sky and Twitter. Bolstering further speculation, social media posts further extrapolated the potential harm facing trans people by ICE agents beyond the claims made in the article by saying that ICE will now deport or disappear trans citizens. Anyone who tried to push back on the legitimacy of those claims were labeled dangerous or Feds for trying to, quote unquote, downplay the threat posed by ice. Assertions of new pressing danger in this back and forth discourse largely took three forms. One saying that because ICE is already doing x bad thing, that means they could also start doing this new bad thing two people asserting that ICE is in fact actually already doing this and three arguments based on distrust of the government and ICE's general lack of Legality. Much of the discussion emerged from the genuine belief that ICE has been granted new power or has been, quote, unquote authorized to detain someone for looking trans. That Trump has, quote unquote, opened the door for ICE to start profiling trans people. That like the Supreme Court's ruling last year, profiling has been essentially green lit for trans people. Or that checking the consistency of gender markers has been added to ICE's quote unquote jurisdiction. And to be 100% clear, there's not been any new ICE memo or policy related to trans people, gender markers or documentation being in their jurisdiction. State Department policy on requiring biological sex on applications has existed for over a year. The real danger posed by this policy is that more trans immigrants could have their visas delayed or in extreme cases, denied, and people may need help navigating this increasingly confusing application process. Still, people have tried to assert that ICE's intentional targeting and profiling of people for being trans was, quote, unquote already happening. In the past year, ICE has detained trans people. It's hard to get exact numbers on this because ICE stopped collecting detention data for trans people last year to comply with Trump's anti trans executive orders. Though we do know of attempts to deport trans people from news reporting. Last August, ICE detained a trans woman who overstayed a visa by six years. And in November, a trans woman who lost her lawful permanent resident status in 2023 after pleading guilty to a felony was, quote, unquote, inadvertently deported to Mexico despite a court order specifically barring her from being sent to Mexico. We have no evidence that these women were targeted for removal on the basis of being trans, but what happened to them is still horrific. As of now, there has been no reporting on people being targeted for detention based on looking trans because the government has not actually argued that being trans itself qualifies as reasonable suspicion of a legal presence. When I voiced skepticism about the claims sourced from this substack article, people responded to me saying that even if this has yet to happen, one could argue that ICE still could expand their operations to include profiling and targeting trans people for detention, since they're already profiling and rounding up, quote unquote, random brown people. After all, this podcast is called It Could Happen Here and ICE has detained both citizens and legal immigrants and sent them to, quote unquote camps. Though this show is called It Could Happen Here, that doesn't mean we should spread unsubstantiated doom spiraling disconnected from the material reality of real policies advancing a fascist project. The Trump administration has been very clear and open about targeting groups of people flooding through our southern border. That is who ICE is designed to target, and they have policy directing them to do so and new permission from the Supreme Court. It is true that ICE has temporarily detained US Citizens when looking for people they suspect are undocumented immigrants. This has been for two reasons. U.S. citizens accused of interfering with ICE activity while protesting, or because ICE suspects U.S. citizens may be undocumented based on factors like skin tone, occupation, or speaking a foreign language, usually Spanish. This second group of people then must demonstrate proof of citizenship, or, if they are immigrants, their legal status. The period they're detained is supposed to be relatively short, usually a few hours, though in extreme cases, that's stretched into multiple days. When I posted about this online, someone sent me a Wikipedia article claiming it proved that ice has deported 170 US citizens during Trump's second term. The article actually said 170 citizens have been detained since Trump took office. Again, there have been a few reported instances of US Born citizens being deported. These are citizen children who are deported with immigrant parents to avoid child separation, though many, many children do end up being separated from their parents when their parents are deported. The last argument that people fall back on is simply that ICE is a completely lawless agency and it can do whatever it wants, including going after trans people. After all, ICE has murdered US Citizens on camera in broad daylight. But it's important to remember that happened for a reason. Those weren't random acts. ICE and CBP murdered people protesting ICE raids targeting their immigrant neighbors. Federal agents killed people because the protesting was an inconvenience and there was use of force policy and training directing them to do so. For decades, CBP agents have killed people at the border and gotten away with it. The Trump administration may not care about the law, but this analysis is not based on any assumptions about legality. It's based on the administration's own stated goals, which they've been very open about, and the policies and practices currently in effect. None of which relate to ICE targeting people for, quote, unquote, looking trans. From what we know, the Kavanaugh Stops framework have never been used to target trans people for being trans as the reasonable suspicion of being illegally in the country. And there's been no change in guidelines saying that being trans can be the basis for said stops. Asserting otherwise is simply false. Insisting that because of State Department application policy, ICE will now randomly arrest trans people is conflating two very different things. This isn't about the potential legality of ICE targeting Trans people. I'm simply saying there is no such directive instructing ICE to do that. Asserting that the Trump administration is completely 100% unbounded by law also ignores the fact that federal and immigration courts are still in active terrain of battle. While the administration has repeatedly ignored courts and judges orders, people have also been successfully released from ICE custody by filing habeas corpus petitions. It's not that I believe in the personal integrity of ICE agents, far from it. But this concept of ICE as this vague fascist death squad that will go after any group the Trump administration hates turns ICE into this abstract idea rather than a single material agency with concrete motivations and limits that leaves a wake of destruction in the course of achieving their purpose. ICE does raids where there's high concentrations of immigrant workers. The targeting isn't actually random. ICE is going after undocumented immigrant workers, sometimes using skin and language as a rough proxy to do document checks to assert the inevitability of ICE going after trans people. People invoke comparisons to the Nazis. And as rhetorically useful as it is to equate ICE to a modern version of the Gestapo, this is not Germany in the 1930s. ICE is a contemporary version, but the current world is different. The chronically online doomer may retort, but once ICE is done with immigrants, then they will go after trans people. After all, what's the purpose of increasing ICE's staffing and funding or building a network of detention camps across the country if not to use them against the undesirables? There's about 15 million undocumented immigrants in the United States and about 3 million trans people. That's five times as many undocumented immigrants than trans people. Last year, ICE reached a record high number of deportations, over 600,000. This number still leaves millions and millions of undocumented immigrants. ICE will never be done with immigrants. This logic again reduces ICE to this vague abstract evil and fails to consider the purpose of ICE and why it currently operates as it does so. What motivates ice? Do individual ICE agents share the same motivations as the agency itself or the people directing it? Individual agents certainly could be motivated by racism, political ideology, a paycheck, or a combination thereof. But the motivating factors across the entire agency cannot solely be based on ethnicity itself, or else you wouldn't see as many Hispanic ICE and CBP agents. People tend to think of hate as a vague causal force itself, rather than it being the result of complex societal factors shaped by material forces like the economy, jobs, insecurity and housing shortages. These Material forces are often expressed as racial or ethnic prejudice. But the underlying motivation of ICE as an agency, and by extension dhs, still rests on material forces, not racial hatred as an abstract ideal. Rank and file employees could have entirely different motivations compared to some of those at the top of the agency or the agency as a whole. And people in charge of the agency may themselves even be confused as to the material motivations that underline the existence of immigration enforcement agencies. But this lack of alignment is a weakness in the agency and DHS more broadly, as demonstrated by the fallout of Operation Metro surge in Minneapolis, which left ICE and DHS in a compromised state. So why does ICE exist? What material role does it fulfill? It seeks to stabilize the social order by targeting surplus populations. And what's the most efficient way to do that? By going after the most marginalized populations with the least amount of legal and economic protections, which are undocumented immigrants. This operation may be sold to the public and indeed its enforcers, by marketing it in the language of race and crime categories, which are often equated. But underneath that, it's still an attempt to solve problems caused by material economic forces. In reality, this material motivation establishes a certain direction of impact, as well as material limits like budget, personnel, and balancing between public approval and public opposition. So with that in mind, does it make sense to claim that Immigration and Customs Enforcement is going to conduct the targeted mass detention of trans people as a class? Signs point to no. It's not that I disagree with the idea that trans people are under threat from the government, but they're under a different threat than that of undocumented immigrants or people detained by ICE based on profiling. Obviously, trans immigrants have an overlapping threat vector. As such, migrant support should remain focused on things like ICE Watch rapid response networks, and providing immigrants legal resources, including to trans immigrants who may need assistance navigating the visa process and working to get people out of ICE detention. The latter is especially important considering Trump's executive order forcing trans women in federal custody to be detained with men and the Trump administration's plan to end federal prison rape protections for trans people. But most people engaged in this discourse genuinely don't understand how State Department policy on visa applications will actually affect trans immigrants and what we can then do to support trans immigrants. But this whole discourse takes the focus away from the people most at risk of ice, which are still undocumented immigrant workers. Lilith in Seattle, with a $150,000 a year tech job, is not at high risk of being detained by ice. Believing otherwise prohibits people who are actually safe and secure from using their wealth and status to support others who do not have the same safety provided by wealth or status, whether they're transgender, an immigrant, or both. Misleading articles in the larger panic driven information economy encourages people with financial or legal security to be scared into paralysis because they believe that any amount of opposition to the government will result in being disappeared to a concentration camp. This justifies a retreat from the world by framing it as safety, allowing one to focus on maximizing their own power and wealth to achieve security. Retreating solely into the role of the victim achieves a sort of emotional catharsis, but this also alienates you from the world and ends up doing propaganda for the enemy. In this discourse, there's a tendency to make the enemy out to be an unstoppable monster, which further justifies inaction because it doesn't allow you to understand the limits of the enemy, whether logistical or ideological, and resigns us to cower before an omnipotent, all powerful evil. ICE operations are an expensive, unpopular, destabilizing thing and we must keep an eye on the fragility of power as that informs us on how to fight it. When removed from action in the real world, people have no way to confront truth it is a frightening time to be transgender. On top of what feels like never ending attacks on healthcare and our ability to exist in public life, you now see news stories about a US state invalidating people's IDs. At the same time as viral social media posts claim ICE has been given new authority to detain trans people and deport immigrants for having the wrong gender marker. Various attacks on trans rights separated through time could be viewed as a coherent, centralized strategy towards a singular, horrific end, but they also may be in fact disparate, often petty attempts at cruelty intending to demoralize trans people and make trans life prohibitively difficult. The way Red States and the Trump Admin are trying to eliminate transgenderism, as Michael Knowles would say, is to simply make it incredibly difficult to socially and medically transition. Like by not recognizing gender on government documents, being excluded from public bathrooms, and continuing efforts to restrict healthcare. We'll do one more break and return for a final segment. The state of catastrophic fear I've been talking about is maintained by a near constant wave of articles with panic inducing headlines which fuel social media posts that further escalate and abstract claims made in headlines to a Nazi Germany esque level of potential danger facing trans people. One such impending danger circulating online this month is the claim that the FDA is making a registry of trans women and moving to criminalize DIY estrogen. This claim originated from an article in a trans News outlet published March 12 reporting that anti trans lobbying groups sent a petition to the FDA to create a registry of trans women who take estrogen and restrict the use of feminizing hrt, which if implemented, could, quote, fast track a pathway to criminalizing estrogen use. Importantly, this citizens petition is not US Law or proposed government legislation, nor is it FDA policy or regulation. It was written by an anti trans activist coalition and sent to the FDA over three months ago in December of 2025. The petition requests, quote unquote immediate action by establishing a new docket for the public to officially comment on the safety and effectiveness of estrogen in gender transitions and to schedule a public hearing on the subject. That is mainly what the petition is for, though it does make further recommendations following the conclusion of a public hearing. These recommendations include adding a warning label to estrogen, conducting a safety review, having clinicians report adverse effects to the fda, and requiring the drug manufacturers quote, establish a patient registry as a part of a risk evaluation and mitigation study to capture real world safety data, unquote and that is the registry mentioned in this panic headline. This article, or more accurately, distorted versions of its claims, went viral across trans Twitter with tens of thousands of likes and hundreds of thousands of quote unquote views. But the article received strong pushback on Blue sky for being, quote, unquote sensationalist and inflammatory. The outlet that originally published the story later updated the article, clarifying that the FDA receives hundreds of petitions a year and even if implemented, they can take years to go into effect. From 2001 to 2013, only 6.6% of FDA citizen petitions were approved and resulted in new regulation. A study from 2016 found that, on average, quote, unquote these petitions require 2.85 years for a final agency decision, and many decisions remain pending 10 to 13 years after their initial submission. Unquote this FDA petition story was not the only article this month theorizing about a trans registry or adult HRT restrictions. In mid March, multiple LGBTQ news outlets reported that Republican lawmakers in Tennessee advanced a bill that would, quote, unquote, create a public list of trans residents in the state. The bill in question mandates insurance companies also cover detransition and would require that care providers submit statistics on gender affirming care to the Tennessee Department of Health, which must, quote, not contain individually identifiable information defined in hipaa. Unquote. The Tennessee Department of Health would then use that information to make a publicly available statistics report. But online accounts are spreading this story as if Tennessee is making a quote unquote sex offender style public registry with the names and locations of all trans people in the state. A bill like this could potentially be used for harm, and it may face court challenges for possibly violating parts of HIPAA by collecting data on county of residence and procedure dates. But the reporting on the bill and the viral reaction online make it out to be something completely different. There's no reason to believe this bill would create a publicly accessible registry or list identifying trans people by name in the state. The bill has not yet passed the state Senate, and it may not in its current form. Right now, it's unclear what exact form the collected data will take within a statistics report and what level of anonymizing data aggregation will be employed. This is something to keep an eye on if the bill does pass and the state Department of Health drafts guidelines for the mandatory statistics reporting. But the way it's being reported is incredibly misleading. Interestingly, the source for this public list claim is the same substack outlet that created the false story about ICE now being able to detain people for looking trans. Also, earlier this month, multiple LGBTQ news outlets reported that the 4th Circuit Court approved state bans on gender affirming health care for adults. On March 10, a Republican appointed three judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that states can prohibit gender affirming surgery from being covered by Medicaid. The ruling affirmed a ban on Medicaid coverage for, quote, sex change surgeries in West Virginia, with the panel arguing it doesn't discriminate against trans people because it applies to specific procedures, not specific individuals. This is certainly bad news for trans people in West Virginia on Medicaid, but reporting that this decision could soon result in trans people losing healthcare in other states or nationally is misleading and removes key context. This is not a total ban on these procedures. It's a ban on state Medicaid coverage of these surgical procedures. The ruling is not a ban on other forms of gender affirming healthcare like hrt, nor does it threaten the hospital's ability to receive Medicare and Medicaid funds for providing gender affirming healthcare like the Trump administration has threatened so far, unsuccessfully. Still, people postulated on how this ruling could be laying the legal groundwork to eliminate adult transgender health care. But trans journalist David Forbes noted that this ruling will likely be appealed to the wider 4th Circuit, which has recently ruled in the opposite direction of this three panel ruling. What panicked assertions of an impending total ban on trans healthcare tends to overlook is that going from a state ban on Medicaid coverage for surgery straight to an all ages ban on gender affirming healthcare skips a lot of steps, and those steps are crucially important. The panic clickbait induced doomer mindset treats every horrific potentiality as an inevitable eventuality. This undermines our ability to accurately assess risk and effectively dedicate resources to oppose what are pressing threats. So what purpose does this sort of posting serve and why are people so primed to believe it? These panic driven claims rest on the very real fact that trans people are facing present danger. Oftentimes, people boosting these panic stories are genuinely trying to help inform their own community of potential harm. In the case of that ICE story, it was based on the assumption that there was a legitimate recent rule change enabling ICE to target people under suspicion of being trans. It makes sense that people would want to raise the alarm about ICE gaining new powers, but ACLU staff attorney Melita Picasso cautioned, quote, we are supporting our community by trying to warn people, but these warnings need to be clear and accurate, otherwise we end up inadvertently contributing to the chaos and fear. Other times these panic stories are spread with the hope of scaring allies into caring about the ongoing attacks on trans people. Perhaps this is successful in some cases, I don't know, but as a side effect, this strategy deals significant damage to the people it's trying to protect. Forecasting Doom 24. 7 can drive people into hopeless despair and push them away from strategies to fight against the current attacks on trans rights. Panic driven agent prop could also contribute to a Girl who Cried Wolf scenario where allies start to discount concerns about certain attacks on trans rights due to previous unsubstantiated viral claims. Though many people spreading these claims may have genuinely good intentions, the people creating these claims may develop certain material incentives. Traditional mainstream journalism has failed to question the massive government overreach into the lives of trans people and in some cases helped manufacture consent for the stripping away of trans rights. This state of affairs has made trans people lose faith in the big outlets leading to small upstart outlets filling in the information gaps in trans news coverage, but without any institutional backing. Independent news sites and substack style blogs have to build an audience to generate traction and stay operating. It turns out thousands of people constantly freaking out creates high social media engagement. This creates a loop where trans panic fear mongering boosts social media engagement, which further encourages more irresponsible clickbait framing. Those who are successful may slowly develop a new class position, which then needs to be maintained. Financial incentives may even pressure journalists who have done good work in the past to fall back on panic driven engagement bait to attract new traffic. This isn't exclusive to trans outlets either. Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Ken Klippenstein reported on his substack that the FBI was about to, quote, designate transgender people as violent extremists. His report contained no new verifiable information. The core evidence was an unnamed, quote unquote senior official who told Klippenstein he quote unquote feels like trans people could be labeled nihilist violent extremists. Cliffenstein has previously misunderstood the nihilist violent extremism label. The term actually predates the second Trump administration and refers to groups like 764 Child's Extortion Rings and communities like the school shooter fandom TCC. Hours before Klippenstein's report was published, the Heritage foundation and the Oversight Project publicly released a petition calling for a new classification of extremism called trans Ideology inspired Violent Extremism to categorize attacks they believed are motivated by transgender ideology. The petition memo denied that all trans people and their allies would be designated domestic terrorists under this label only those who, quote, encourage, promote, condone, take or incite unlawful violent action or threats based on this ideology, unquote. The Heritage petition also runs contrary to Klippenstein's report by advocating against the use of the nihilist violent extremism label to describe transgender motivated violence. A Heritage petition to establish a new category of extremism is different from an unnamed official who feels like trans people as a whole could be labeled as nihilist violent extremists. And and it's important to understand that distinction. That was last September. It's now half a year later and neither of these things has come to fruition. The closest we got was in late September following Trump's antifa terrorism executive order with the National Security Presidential Memorandum Number seven, which listed quote, extremism on migration, race and gender as common recurrent motivations and indica of violent and terroristic activities under the umbrella of of self described anti fascism, unquote, among many other threads animating violent conduct. Regardless of that, people online interpreted both Klippenstein's report and the Heritage petition as meaning the FBI classified the entire class of trans people as domestic terrorists. Social media both amplifies and distorts already misleading claims. Turning news into a massive game of telephone and the siloing of certain users and platforms makes countering this misinformation incredibly difficult. The social media economy carries certain incentives for the producers of panic bait. That could be attention, status and money. But the consumers of panic also stand to gain something catharsis justification for their actions or lack thereof, as well as attention from fellow consumers. These clickbait panic pieces explode around Trans Twitter, which is still quite active, consisting of sex workers, gamers, TTT style posters, and zoomers who think blue sky is cringe and liberal. Some of these panic stories, like the FDA registry, don't do very well on Blue sky because that's where a lot of trans journalists who do actual journalism are. But those journalists are not active on Twitter and TikTok, making it harder to to counter misinformation on those platforms. Countering trans panic Clickbait also suffers from algorithmic suppression because it doesn't get people as riled up. A wave of emotionally charged doom posting is boosted much farther than a calm and calculated rebuttal. The biggest TikTok about ICE detaining people under suspicion of being trans has 1.2 million views. The biggest TikTok fact checking this claim has 290,000 views so much of social media politics is emotional manipulation based on anger, fear, or catharsis. Posting about perceived danger is essentially viewed as a form of activism, and if someone casts doubt on what's seen as an existential threat, that person becomes emotionally equated with the enemy. Panic produces helplessness, but helplessness can actually be cathartic for the individual. It's not helpful for people currently in the most danger. So then, what is there to do in terms of the trans panic information economy? Don't be afraid to openly question the legitimacy of certain reporting due to fear of backlash from the community. If it's good reporting, it should be able to stand up to scrutiny. So when you see a news story that triggers an emotional response, stop a moment before clicking Share and find out where this claim is coming from. A reliable journalistic outlet? An independent publication? What other reporting has this publication done? Has it been accurate? Who is the reporter? Are you familiar with their reporting? What else have they reported on? Is it speculative? Are there logical jumps without supporting evidence? Again, I'm not trying to minimize the danger coming from attacks on trans people. Quite the contrary, the right is continuing to take away trans rights and these threats should be treated seriously. But when trying to counter these real attacks, one must be cautious about looking so far ahead into the speculative future that it takes the focus away from the clear and present harms. This isn't about trusting the government, it's about understanding the world in order to change it. See you on the other side. You can find a text version of this episode on the Shatterzone substack with hyperlinks available for many of the terms or reporting referenced. It Could Happen Here is a production of Cool Zone Media. For more podcasts from Cool Zone Media, Visit our website coolzonemedia.com or check us out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can now find sources for It Could Happen here listed directly in Episode Descriptions. Thanks for listening. This is an I heart podcast. Guaranteed human.