LANSING, MI — Michigan lawmakers are considering sweeping updates to the state’s Public Health Code and identification laws, which include provisions for gender marker changes on birth certificates, state identification cards, and driver’s licenses. The proposals have ignited debate, with supporters emphasizing inclusivity and detractors raising concerns about societal and administrative implications, particularly regarding the age at which such changes should be allowed.

Overview of the Proposal

The proposed legislation includes:

• Gender Marker Flexibility: Individuals may select "M," "F," or "X" as their gender on birth certificates, state IDs, and driver’s licenses without requiring additional medical or legal documentation, except for a court order in cases involving name changes.

• Streamlined Birth Certificate Updates: New certificates can be issued for changes in paternity, adoption, or gender identity.

• Privacy Protections: Victims of stalking, domestic violence, or human trafficking could request confidential records or name changes.

Support for the Legislation

Advocates argue the changes reflect a growing societal recognition of diverse gender identities. LGBTQ+ organizations and civil liberties groups say the proposed amendments simplify processes for individuals seeking to align their legal documents with their gender identity, fostering greater dignity and reducing bureaucratic barriers.

“This is about ensuring that all Michiganders, regardless of gender identity, can have documentation that accurately represents who they are,” said a representative from an LGBTQ+ advocacy group. “These changes bring Michigan’s laws in line with federal standards and practices in other progressive states.”

Support my independent journalism, if you haven’t already, by becoming a paid subscriber. I can’t keep doing this work without all of you.

Become a Supporter

Proponents also highlight the importance of privacy protections for victims of violence, saying that shielding sensitive information could save lives.

Michigan Rep. Brad Paquette posted the following on his X account:

“House Democrats would not let me speak in opposition to HB5300-5303, which allows children as young as 14 years old to change their sex on identifying documents like birth certificates... without even parent consent. They will also have the option to change it to an "X". Speaker Pro Temp Pohutsky took me aside and insinuated it was because @libsoftiktok saw my post covering the committee hearing on the bills. I was out of order for addressing the rest of the democrats and letting them know that we will allow appropriate dissent on every piece of legislation when we take the gavels back in January.”

 

 

Criticism of the Proposal

Critics, however, raise questions about the implications of allowing gender marker changes without medical or psychological evaluations, particularly for minors. Some argue that such decisions could have long-term consequences that young individuals might not fully understand.

“It’s one thing to respect an individual’s right to identify how they choose, but it’s another to allow these changes without sufficient checks and balances,” said a critic of the bill. “This legislation could have unintended effects, especially if minors are involved.”

The proposal does not specify a minimum age for requesting gender marker changes, which has sparked concerns from family advocates who believe that allowing such changes without parental consent or professional guidance could be problematic.

Click the bill number to read the legislation: Bill 5300, Bill 5301, Bill 5302, Bill 5303,

Broader Concerns

Business and administrative groups have also voiced concerns about potential implementation challenges. Adjusting systems to accommodate non-binary and changing gender markers could require significant investment and training, especially for smaller government offices.

Additionally, some question whether the legislation strikes the right balance between individual freedoms and broader societal norms. “While inclusivity is important, we need to consider the long-term effects of making these changes so easily accessible,” said a policy expert.

Impact on Michigan Families

The proposal has also drawn attention to questions about parental involvement. Critics argue that gender marker changes for minors, especially those under 18, should involve a higher degree of scrutiny, including medical or psychological evaluations and parental consent. Proponents counter that such restrictions could disproportionately harm young people struggling with gender dysphoria.

Next Steps

The bill is expected to undergo committee review and public hearings before it moves to a vote in the legislature. Both supporters and opponents plan to mobilize their efforts to influence the outcome.

“This is a conversation that requires thoughtful consideration of all perspectives,” said one lawmaker. “It’s about balancing individual rights with societal responsibilities.”

If passed, Michigan would join a growing number of states that allow flexible gender markers on legal documents, but the debate underscores the complex and deeply personal nature of these issues.

A newly released report by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has revealed that the FBI had at least 26 confidential human sources (CHSs) embedded in the crowd during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. These sources, some of whom were in restricted areas or even entered the Capitol, provided intelligence both before and during the attack. However, the report highlights systemic failures in utilizing this intelligence, leaving critical questions about the federal response to one of the most significant security breaches in U.S. history.

The Role of Confidential Informants

The report outlines that the FBI's confidential informants were tasked with monitoring domestic terrorism threats and gathering intelligence from within extremist groups. Sources included individuals with connections to groups like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, both of which had members who played central roles in the attack. Several of these informants traveled to Washington, D.C., voluntarily, while others were specifically instructed to observe activities related to the rally and its aftermath.

Support my independent journalism by becoming a paid subscriber at $5 a month if you haven’t yet done so. I can’t do this without all of you. Lock in now at $5 before it goes up to $6 in 2025.

 

Become a Supporter

 

Out of the 26 identified informants, four entered the Capitol, and 13 others were present in restricted areas around the Capitol. None of these sources faced prosecution, reflecting the broader Department of Justice policy that prioritized prosecuting individuals involved in violent actions over those who trespassed without engaging in criminal conduct.

Despite the presence of these sources, the report notes critical intelligence and coordination failures within the FBI. While the agency gathered significant information in the weeks leading up to January 6, it failed to act on key warnings that could have shaped its response to the potential for violence.

The media seems to have missed the real details of this story. Take a look at the CNN headline, which is not accuate.

 

Missed Opportunities for Intelligence Gathering

One of the most striking findings of the OIG report is the FBI's failure to issue a comprehensive canvass of its field offices to gather intelligence ahead of January 6. This basic procedure is typically used to collect actionable information from local informants and law enforcement partners. The report criticized the FBI for overlooking this crucial step, with FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate admitting that the omission represented a missed opportunity.

The report revealed that several confidential sources warned the FBI of potential violence, including threats from individuals planning to travel to Washington, D.C., armed and prepared to engage in conflict. Informants also flagged communications among extremist groups discussing disrupting the certification of the Electoral College results.

Despite these warnings, the FBI's Washington Field Office (WFO) did not fully coordinate efforts to assess and act on this intelligence. The report described a lack of communication between field offices and federal leadership, as well as missed opportunities to share intelligence with partner agencies, including the U.S. Capitol Police and the Department of Homeland Security.

Failures in Anticipating the Scale of the Threat

While the FBI was not the lead agency responsible for securing the Capitol—jurisdiction fell primarily to the U.S. Capitol Police—the report criticized the lack of coordination between federal and local agencies. Senior FBI officials acknowledged that the agency underestimated the scale and nature of the threat posed by January 6, despite clear indications of potential violence.

For example, the FBI’s internal communications showed that some officials dismissed warnings as speculative or unlikely to materialize. This attitude, coupled with insufficient inter-agency coordination, left law enforcement woefully unprepared for the scale of violence that unfolded that day.

Accountability and Policy Changes

The presence of federal agents and informants in the January 6 crowd raises broader questions about the role of confidential informants in monitoring domestic events. While these sources provided critical insights into extremist planning and activities, the failure to act on their intelligence has drawn scrutiny.

The OIG report calls for reforms to ensure better utilization of confidential informants and improved communication between field offices and federal leadership. The report also recommends clearer protocols for intelligence sharing with local law enforcement agencies during high-risk events.

Renewed Debate Over Federal Response

The revelations are likely to intensify public debate over the federal government’s handling of January 6. Critics argue that the FBI’s intelligence failures represent a systemic issue that demands accountability. Others have raised concerns about the ethical and operational challenges of deploying informants in politically charged environments.

Proponents of the FBI’s approach point to the difficulty of balancing civil liberties with the need to monitor extremist threats. However, the OIG report underscores the need for the agency to act decisively when credible threats are identified, particularly in situations involving potential violence against democratic institutions.

Next Steps

In the wake of the report, lawmakers and public watchdogs are calling for hearings to scrutinize the FBI’s actions before and during January 6. These discussions are expected to focus on how the agency can improve its intelligence-gathering processes and avoid similar failures in the future.

The OIG’s findings add a new dimension to the ongoing investigation into January 6, offering a detailed account of how federal agencies monitored—and in some cases participated in—the events of that day. With the FBI facing increased scrutiny, the report serves as a reminder of the challenges inherent in safeguarding democracy while respecting civil liberties and ensuring accountability.

 

 

Michigan taxpayers are slated to give $259 million to a mystery company to build a semiconductor plant near Mundy Township in Genessee County.

The Charter Township of Mundy entered a nondisclosure agreement with the Michigan Economic Development Corporation on Sept. 9, 2022, which Michigan Capitol Confidential obtained through a records request.

State officials approved a total of $259 million in Strategic Site Readiness Program funds, which will go to local agencies involved in preparing a large parcel of land for development. The project could be eligible for more grants.

The township entered that agreement at least a year before voters discovered giveaway of state dollars. On Nov. 5, 2024, voters ousted township supervisor Tonya Ketzler and elected Jennifer Stainton, who opposed the giveaway.

“My position has been on the opposition side due to the lack of transparency on behalf of Mundy Township board members,” Stainton told CapCon in an email. “Signing a NDA is unacceptable to hide things from your elective public you represent. Until we see transparency from the township and from the Genesee Economic Alliance, my fight is to protect and serve my Community of Residents who put me in office.” Click here to read more.

 

DETROIT– The Michigan chapter of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) sent an email to its members and supporters asking them to protect the rights of students who are illegal immigrants.

The message also includes a link to the national AFT union advice to illegal migrants on how to handle ICE.

The national union advises illegals: “Do not open the door. ICE authorities cannot come in without a signed judicial warrant. Tell them to pass the warrant under the door before you open it.”

AFT-Michigan President Terrence Martin wrote this message in his Dec. 9 President’s Update correspondence: “AFT members who work in schools—from teachers, school support staff and nurses, to bus drivers—can play a critical role in helping end the cruel criminalization, detention and deportation of students and families,” Martin wrote.

AFT-Michigan has about 35,000 members and represents the Detroit Public Schools Community District. Click here to read more.

 

SAN DIEGO, CALIF - On Tuesday, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors voted 3-1 for a policy that would turn the jurisdiction into a “super sanctuary” county, thereby preventing its sheriff’s department from notifying ICE about illegal immigrants who had committed violent crimes.

The policy goes beyond California state law and will require a judge’s order for ICE to receive assistance from the county to transfer illegal immigrants convicted of violent crimes to immigration authorities.

San Diego County Sheriff Kelly A. Martinez immediately responded, issuing a statement that said: “The Sheriff’s Office will not change its practices based on the Board resolution and policy that was passed at today’s meeting. The Board of Supervisors does not set policy for the Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff, as an independently elected official, sets the policy for the Sheriff’s Office. California law prohibits the Board of Supervisors from interfering with the independent, constitutionally and statutorily designated investigative functions of the Sheriff, and is clear that the Sheriff has the sole and exclusive authority to operate the county jails.”

“I think this policy goes beyond California’s existing sanctuary laws by adding an additional layer of bureaucracy that hinders local law enforcement from directly notifying ICE about illegal immigrants who are currently in our jails,” Supervisor Jim Desmond, the lone dissenting vote, declared. “And they have committed heinous crimes, including child abuse or endangerment, driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, but only if this conviction is for a felony, possession of an unlawful deadly weapon, gang-related offenses, a crime resulting in death or involving personal affliction or great bodily injury, possession or use of a firearm in the commission of an offense, torture, rape, and kidnapping. That’s the population we’re talking about.” Click here to read more.

 

DEL RIO, TX - The incoming Trump administration intends to scrap a longstanding policy that largely prevents federal immigration authorities from arresting illegal migrants in areas that are known as “sensitive” locations, according to an NBC News report.

President-elect Donald Trump would like to allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to begin arresting illegal migrants at or near hospitals, schools, churches and other areas deemed to be “sensitive” locations without needing prior approval from their supervisors, according to NBC News. Trump, who won the presidential election with a hardline immigration platform, may issue the rule change as soon as his first day in office.

The reported policy change could allow ICE agents to better follow through on one of the president-elect’s most notable campaign promises: conducting the largest deportation operation in American history.

A policy of not conducting apprehensions at sensitive locations — with exceptions relating to terrorism, national security threats or other imminent dangers — has been on the books for over a decade within the agency. Then-ICE Director John Morton issued a memo in October 2011 that largely prohibited agents from operating in schools or churches, establishing a policy that extended into the Trump and Biden administrations. Click here to read more.

 

LOS ANGELES, CALIF - An audit released this week by Los Angeles City Controller Kenneth Mejia found over $200 million in taxpayer dollars went to waste on anti-homelessness initiatives.

On Tuesday, Mejia released the Pathways to Permanent Housing Homelessness Audit, which examined city initiatives to help move homeless residents to permanent housing from 2019 to 2023. That report noted, however, “a woefully inadequate number of people” staying in interim facilities moved on to permanent housing.

One in four interim beds went unused, according to the report, costing taxpayers roughly $218 million over five years. While the programs aim to have a 95% occupancy rate, they did not exceed 78% in any year. The lowest occupancy rate was 64% in 2021.

“For beds that were occupied, less than 20% of people were successfully housed and more than half returned to homelessness/unknown destinations,” the report reads. “In addition, there are concerns about long-term stability for many people who were placed into permanent housing.”

Mejia called on Los Angeles officials to do better for the homeless population.

Click here to read more.