Maine Democrats push bill that would allow state to seize kids from parents preventing them from getting sex-change surgeries

Democrats in Maine are poised to advance legislation that would grant the state emergency jurisdiction over children whose parents refuse to subject them to sex-change mutilations and other confusion-affirming medical interventions. Additionally, it would prevent authorities from reuniting runaways with parents out of state if they traveled to Maine to have their genitals removed.

A judiciary committee hearing was originally scheduled for Wednesday morning to discuss whether to advance LD 1735, the so-called "Act to Safeguard Gender-affirming Health Care." However, the review has reportedly been postponed on account of bad weather and will now be held at 3:00 p.m. on Jan. 25.

The bill resembles "kidnapping" legislation in various Democratic-run states, including Democratic California state Rep. Scott Wiener's SB 107, which made California a so-called sanctuary for child sex-change mutilations.

Should the act pass:

• courts would be prohibited from considering the abduction of a child from a parent or guardian who has legal custody "if the taking or retention was for obtaining gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming or gender-affirming mental health care";
• courts will be authorized to "take temporary jurisdiction because a child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care"; and
• law enforcement would be barred from participating in the "arrest or extradition of an individual pursuant to an out-of-state arrest warrant" based on laws against the sexual mutilation of children.

"Gender-affirming health care" is defined as "medically necessary health care that respects the gender identity of the patient, as experienced and defined by the patient."

This so-called "care" includes genital mutilations; sterilizing chemical interventions and hormone therapies; and cosmetic surgeries "to align the patient's appearance or physical body with the patient's gender identity."

"Gender-affirming mental health care" is defined thusly: "Mental health care or behavioral health care that respects the gender identity of the patient, as experienced and defined by the patient, including, but not limited to, developmentally appropriate exploration and integration of identity, reduction of distress, adaptive coping and strategies to increase family acceptance."

Children taken from their parents and rendered wards of the state would thereafter have access to state-funded programs that pay down the cost of the irreversible and disfiguring procedures.

The bill's primary sponsor is state Rep. Laurie Osher, the leader of the legislature's LGBTQ+ Equality Caucus. Its cosponsors are Democratic state Reps. Erin Sheehan, James Worth, Matthew Moonen, Nina Azella Milliken, and Suzanne M. Salisbury and state Sen. Anne Carney.

Ahead of the state judiciary committee's now-postponed meeting Wednesday, the parental rights group Courage Is a Habit ramped up its pressure campaign to "take a chunk out of the Transgender Cult," providing the email addresses of the committee members.

Alvin Lui, president of Courage Is a Habit, told the Post Millennial, "If you're wondering how you got there in Maine, wherever you live ... it's because over time, you've allowed your kindness to be weaponized against you and they kept moving that goalpost and now, even when they're proposing a transgender trafficking bill, they're still using emotional blackmail to try to get you to accept this."

Libs of TikTok highlighted this legislation prioritizing the medicalization of children over parental rights, prompting significant backlash.

Megyn Kelly wrote on X, "This is SICK! Bombard them with emails. This cannot pass."

Mike Davis of the Article III Project noted, "This is clearly unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution. And the most monstrous bill I've seen in a long time."

Political scientist and legal scholar Carol Swain asked, "Do we really want the state making medical decisions for our children or elderly parents? I don't think so."

"Demonic," wrote Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.

Other critics suggested LD1735 amounted to a Democratic effort to increase medical tourism to the state and to increase the profits pharmaceutical companies.

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