(The Center Square) – The California Legislature quashed a bill that would have banned students from using sex-segregated programs or facilities of the opposite gender, after California Gov. Gavin Newsom signaled his support for such a policy while hosting conservative activist Charlie Kirk on his podcast.

“Well, I think it’s an issue of fairness. I completely agree with you on that … it’s deeply unfair,” said Newsom when Kirk asked about whether he thinks it’s fair that boys are participating in girls’ sports.

The bill, Assembly Bill 844, would have required that when it comes to sex-segregated facilities and programs, students of all ages would be segregated according to their sex, not their gender identity.

Bill author Bill Essayli, a Republican who resigned Tuesday from the Assembly to take an appointment as a U.S. attorney, argued that it’s unfair and dangerous for biological males to participate in girls’ sports and access girls’ locker rooms.

“California’s current policy allowing biological males to compete in girls’ sports and access female locker rooms is not only unfair —it’s dangerous,” wrote Essayli in support of the bill. “It violates the privacy of our students, robs female athletes of their hard-earned opportunities and undermines the very intent of Title IX.”

Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal funding, and is largely credited with increasing female sports and activity availability.

Opponents argued the legislation would result in discrimination and harm transgender students.

“The bill would discriminate against transgender individuals and prohibit them from playing school sports — even if they have been living consistent with their gender identity and receiving treatment for gender dysphoria, for years,” wrote Equality California. “The bill would also invite scrutiny and harassment of any student perceived as not conforming to sex stereotypes, and violate student privacy by requiring students to answer invasive personal questions if they want to play sports or even to use the bathroom.”

The bill failed at its first committee vote, only earning the support of the committee’s two Republicans. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, was the lone Democrat to abstain from the vote as the other Democrats voted in opposition. 

When asked at a press conference Wednesday on the bill, Newsom said the state is facing a “myriad” of issues right now and that it’s not where “all” of his “energy” flows.

“How can you make this fair? And I haven’t been able to figure it out,” said Newsom. “This is not where all my energy flows. You’re talking about a very small number of people.”

“To the extent that someone could find that right balance, I would embrace those conversations,” continued Newsom.

(The Center Square) – A legislator known for his conservative stance on illegal immigration and other issues has been nominated for U.S. attorney for a district that includes Los Angeles County.

Assemblymember Bill Essayli, R-Corona, resigned Tuesday night from the California State Assembly to accept President Donald Trump’s appointment to the U.S. District for Central California. The appointment will require the Senate’s confirmation.

During a Fox interview, Essayli said his top priorities as U.S. attorney would include prosecuting illegal immigrants and those who aid and support them.

In January, Essayli sought answers from Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom about whether bills introduced to “Trump-proof” the state would hinder the president’s mass deportation efforts. Essayli told Fox News Digital he believed money from a $50 million initiative would be used to defend illegal immigrants with criminal records. Newsom’s office later said no funds would be used for “immigration-related services for criminals.”

In 2024, Essayli amended his Assembly Bill 2641 to end sanctuary protections for illegal immigrants convicted of sex crimes against minors. 

After Trump’s nomination, Essayli said he felt honored by the trust placed in him by the president and Attorney General Pam Bondi.

“I intend to implement the President’s mission to restore trust in our justice system and pursue those who dare to cause harm to the United States and the People of our nation,” the former Riverside County legislator said in a statement. 

The Central District consists of Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties. The district serves about 20 million people.

Essayli, a former Riverside County prosecutor and former assistant U.S. attorney, became the Assembly’s first Muslim member when he was elected in 2022.

“In just over two years, we have achieved major victories to restore common sense in Sacramento,” Essayli said. “When I joined the Assembly, parental rights, illegal immigration and voter ID were peripheral issues; we’ve made them centerpieces of our party. This past election we added true fighters, and I am confident they will continue the important work needed in the Legislature to make Republicans start winning in California.”

(The Center Square) – Minority benefit against the majority giving up “agency, creativity, decision-making and other vital skills” in what is described as a valley of an artificial intelligence journey is likely in the next few years, says one voice among hundreds in a report from Elon University.

John M. Stuart’s full-length essay, one of 200 such responses in “Being Human in 2035: How Are We Changing in the Age of AI?,” speaks to the potential problems foreseen as artificial intelligence continues to be incorporated into everyday life by many at varying levels from professional to personal to just plain curious. The report authored by Janna Anderson and Lee Rainie of Elon’s Imagining the Digital Future Center says “the fragile future of some foundational and unique traits” found only in humans is a concern for 6 in 10.

“I fear – the time being – that while there will be a growing minority benefitting ever more significantly with these tools, most people will continue to give up agency, creativity, decision-making and other vital skills to these still-primitive AIs and the tools will remain too centralized and locked down with interfaces that are simply out of our personal control as citizens,” writes Smart, a self-billed global futurist, foresight consultant, entrepreneur and CEO of Foresight University. “I fear we’re still walking into an adaptive valley in which things continue to get worse before they get better. Looking ahead past the next decade, I can imagine a world in which open-source personal AIs are trustworthy and human-centered.

“Many political reforms will reempower our middle class and greatly improve rights and autonomy for all humans, whether or not they are going through life with PAIs. I would bet the vast majority of us will consider ourselves joined at the hip to our digital twins once they become useful enough. I hope we have the courage, vision and discipline to get through this AI valley as quickly and humanely as we can.”

Among the ideas by 2035 from the essays, Paul Saffo offered, “The first multi-trillion-dollar corporation will employ no humans except legally required executives and board, have no offices, own no property and operate entirely through AI and automated systems.”

Saffo is a futurist and technology forecaster in the Silicon Valley of California, and a consulting professor at the School of Engineering at Stanford.

In another, Vint Cerf wrote, “We may find it hard to distinguish between artificial personalities and the real ones. That may result in a search for reliable proof of humanity so that we and bots can tell the difference.”

Cerf is generally known as one of the “fathers of the internet” alongside Robert Kahn and for the internet protocol suite, colloquially known as TCP/IP.

Working alongside the well-respected Elon University Poll, the survey asked, “What might be the magnitude of overall change in the next decade in people’s native operating systems and operations as we more broadly adapt to and use advanced AIs by 2035? From five choices, 61% said considerable (deep and meaningful change 38%) and dramatic (fundamental, revolutionary change 23%) and another 31% said moderate and noticeable, meaning clear and distinct.

Only 5% said minor change and 3% no noticeable change.

“This report is a revealing and provocative declaration to the profound depth of change people are undergoing – often without really noticing at all – as we adapt to deeper uses of advancing AI technology,” Anderson said. “Collectively, these experts are calling on humanity to think intentionally and carefully, taking wise actions now, so we do not sleepwalk into an AI future that we never intended and do not want.”

In another question, respondents answered whether artificial intelligence and related technologies are likely to change the essence of being human. Fifty percent said changes were equally better and worse, 23% said mostly for the worse, and 16% said mostly for the better.

The analysis predicted change mostly negative in nine areas: social and emotional intelligence; capacity and willingness to think deeply about complex concepts; trust in widely shared values and norms; confidence in their native abilities; empathy and application of moral judgment; mental well-being; sense of agency; sense of identity and purpose; and metacognition.

Mostly positive, the report says, are curiosity and capacity to learn; decision-making and problem-solving; and innovative thinking and creativity.

Anderson and Rainie and those working on the analysis did not use large language models for writing and editing, or in analysis of the quantitative data for the qualitative essays. Authors said there was brief experimentation and human realization “there were serious flaws and inaccuracies.” The report says 223 of 301 who responded did so “fully generated out of my own mind, with no LLM assistance.”

Results were gathered between Dec. 27 and Feb. 1.