A second transgender candidate running for the majority Republican Ohio House could be disqualified from the ballot after omitting her former name on circulating petitions.

A second transgender candidate running for a seat in the Republican-majority Ohio House is at risk of being disqualified from the ballot after omitting her former name on circulating petitions.

The Mercer County Board of Elections is set to vote Thursday on whether Arienne Childrey, a Democrat from Auglaize County and one of four transgender individuals campaigning for the Legislature, is eligible to run after not disclosing her previous name, also known as her deadname, on her petition paperwork.

A little-used Ohio elections law, unfamiliar even to many state elections officials, mandates that candidates disclose any name changes in the last five years on their petitions paperwork, with exemptions for name changes due to marriage. But the law isn’t listed in the 33-page candidate requirement guide and there is no space on the petition paperwork to list any former names.

  • toomanypancakes@lemmy.worldEnglish
    473·
    10 months ago

    Selectively enforcing for a certain segment of the population an unadvertised rule is total copshit

    • merc
      117·
      10 months ago

      Where do you get the idea there’s selective enforcement?

      • Arcane_Trixster@lemm.ee
        181·
        10 months ago

        The fact nobody knew about the law, it’s not mentioned during registration, there is no place for other names on the form, and it’s only been used to exclude trans candidates.

        Do you understand the words you’re using? It’s all in the article’s outline.

        • merc
          15·
          10 months ago

          The fact nobody knew about the law,

          Explained by the fact that most people just keep using the same names.

          it’s not mentioned during registration

          Also explained by the fact that most people just keep using the same names.

          there is no place for other names on the form

          Since it almost never applies, nobody noticed this.

          and it’s only been used to exclude trans candidates.

          That’s not true.

          Do you understand the words you’re using?

          I do, but I’m convinced you don’t.

      • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
        11·
        10 months ago

        Where do you get the idea there’s selective enforcement?

        From them enforcing the (bad) rule on her, but not on cisgender candidates or even other trans candidates.

        • merc
          1·
          10 months ago

          The cisgender candidates… who didn’t change their names? How would that work exactly?

            • merc
              1·
              10 months ago

              The one where a bunch of people have had issues with the form? The one where 4 of them have been trans, but others have been cis? But, somehow people want to pretend it’s a law targeting trans people? Yep, I’ve been following it. I think you haven’t though. You’ve been off in your own world where the sky is yellow and your imagination leads the way.

                • merc
                  1·
                  10 months ago

                  Nope, your reading comprehension is lacking.

                  • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
                    1·
                    10 months ago

                    I’m not the one making false and vaguely transphobic claims in a thread they apparently aren’t even following.