Documents Reveal ADF Requested Anti-Trans Research From American College of Pediatricians
Documents left public on a Google Drive by anti-人兽性交+ hate group American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds), first reported by WIRED, reveal nearly a decade of coordination between ACPeds and another hate group, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), to shore up anti-trans policy efforts and legal arguments with bespoke research.
Between Sept. 30 and Dec. 1, 2014, ADF sent letters to school boards in Minnesota, Rhode Island, Virginia and Wisconsin warning that they could be open to litigation for policies allowing transgender students to use appropriate facilities such as bathrooms and locker rooms. On Dec. 5, 2014, ADF sent an email with a similar message to school superintendents across the U.S. The letters and emails were signed by Jeremy D. Tedesco, then senior counsel at ADF, now responsible for 鈥渆fforts to combat corporate cancel culture.鈥�
In a November 2014 blog post decrying a transgender-inclusive nondiscrimination ordinance in Houston, Texas, then-ADF president Alan Sears highlighted the letters and ADF鈥檚 campaign against 人兽性交+ nondiscrimination protections. Sears also repeated an anti-人兽性交+ trope claiming that nondiscrimination protections put children at risk and the 鈥渟afety implications鈥� of 人兽性交+ nondiscrimination laws 鈥渁re so obvious as to hardly need elaboration.鈥�
The only problem for Sears and Tedesco was a lack of evidence to support their claims; and, to make the claims stick, someone needed to elaborate. A new trove of from the American College of Pediatricians suggests ADF turned to the group known to traffic in anti-人兽性交+ 鈥�junk science鈥� to 鈥渟ubstantiate鈥� many of its anti-人兽性交+ talking points and provide medical justification for interpreting Title IX to exclude gender-identity protections. Together, the documents offer insight into how the groups manufactured legislative, legal and public relations challenges to medical science and public policy throughout the 2010s that have resulted in a of abortion rights and nearly unprecedented on bodily autonomy in the U.S.
ACPeds did not respond to a emailed request for comment on Hatewatch鈥檚 findings.
ACPeds and the anti-人兽性交+ hate movement
Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 is a federal civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools that receive federal funding. Restricting the interpretation of 鈥渟ex-based discrimination鈥� to apply only to straight, cisgender students has been one of the anti-人兽性交+ movement鈥檚 longstanding goals. As trans visibility has increased, hate groups have argued, without evidence, that trans people pose a threat to women and girls, and that trans-inclusive nondiscrimination protections under Title IX jeopardize the safety of cisgender girls in particular.
Before he sent the letters, Tedesco seemed to recognize the lack of scientific evidence supporting ADF鈥檚 arguments against 人兽性交+ nondiscrimination laws, according to documents Hatewatch reviewed. Metadata associated with one document, a copy of an email titled 鈥�Transgender Research Requests,鈥� suggests the file originated with 鈥淛TEDESCO鈥� at 鈥淎DF鈥� on Aug. 11, 2014.
The message is addressed to Dr. Michelle Cretella, ACPeds鈥� executive director until 2021, and two others. It appears to be a follow-up to a previous call between Tedesco and the email recipients. The email asks for ACPeds to provide ADF with 鈥渨hite papers鈥� on five topics related to 人兽性交+ children and healthcare. White papers are research reports that convey subject matter expertise, but are also used as by corporations. The document from ADF to ACPeds even instructs the junk science organization on specifics, citing a 2013 Heritage Foundation article by Ryan Anderson arguing against same-sex marriage as an example of the 鈥渢ype of paper we have in mind.鈥�
ACPeds has a reputation within the anti-人兽性交+ movement as an organization that attempts to obscure its anti-人兽性交+ ideology and its connection to the religious right using medical pseudoscience. ACPeds was founded in 2002 after about 60 members broke away from the 60,000+ member medical association the American Academy of Pediatrics over its support for adoption by same-sex couples. ACPeds is now led by Jill Simons and reports more than 600 members, although the group allows members who are not physicians.
The group claims to be above the influence of 鈥渢he politically driven pronouncements of the day,鈥� but the circumstances of ACPeds鈥� founding and its entrenchment within anti-人兽性交+ policy networks make clear its primary purpose 鈥� to restrict 人兽性交+ rights. For example, an earlier document leak in 2023 that exposed emails between South Dakota, Idaho and Florida lawmakers and a network of anti-人兽性交+ activists showed the influence of the group鈥檚 former president Dr. Quentin Van Meter, Cretella and the co-chair of ACPeds鈥� Committee on Adolescent Sexuality, Dr. Andre Van Mol, on the and adoption of legislation banning gender-affirming healthcare across the country between 2018 and 2020.
A recent report by Kit O鈥機onnell and Steven Monacelli at the Texas Observer details ACPeds鈥� admiration for conservative megadonor 鈥檚 successful campaign to shut down the Gender Education and Care, Interdisciplinary Support (GENECIS) program at Children鈥檚 Medical Center Dallas in late 2021 because the hospital provides gender-affirming care.
The new documents seem to confirm the national reach of ACPeds and its focus on restricting 人兽性交+ rights. In a Jan. 21, 2020, board conference call, the group discussed so-called 鈥淰ulnerable Child Protection Acts鈥� that ban gender-affirming healthcare for young people, noting the laws were 鈥渄rafted by ADF [Alliance Defending Freedom]/LC [Liberty Counsel] & ACPeds鈥� and 鈥渁re being introduced around the country.鈥� The minutes indicate that to that point, 鈥淎CPeds members have been recruited to testify on behalf of these bills in GA, AL, KY and OH.鈥�
The trove of internal documents also shows the group鈥檚 leadership has, for years, disregarded questions about its and even Cretella鈥檚 own qualifications for treating transgender people, in favor of anti-人兽性交+ advocacy. In an email from Cretella dated Aug. 28, 2017, the former executive director says, 鈥淚n the past I鈥檝e been told by lawyers on our side that I do not qualify as an expert witness because I am not an academic and do not have experience caring for children with gender identity disorder.鈥� The same year, Cretella authored dozens of letters to elected officials opposing gender-affirming healthcare and 人兽性交+ nondiscrimination policies.
In 2020, then-ACPeds president Quentin Van Meter was 鈥溾�� on hormone treatment in a Texas court, but before state lawmakers advocating against gender-affirming healthcare. ACPeds also regularly issues policy statements, amicus curiae (鈥渇riend of the court鈥�) briefs, domestically and internationally, and promotes appearances by its leadership in conservative media, disguising itself as a medical authority while spreading anti-人兽性交+ 鈥渏unk science.鈥�
The request from ADF: Help undermine 人兽性交+ protections in Title IX
In 2017, Hatewatch reported on ADF鈥檚 鈥渟table鈥� of purported 鈥渆xpert鈥� witnesses, including Dr. Paul Hruz and Dr. Allan Josephson, who were called to help defend discrimination against transgender students. Although both hold medical degrees, Hruz and Josephson were at odds with their professional organizations鈥� official positions on gender-affirming care and, like Cretella, reported never treating patients with gender dysphoria. What the witnesses held in common were anti-人兽性交+ beliefs and a relationship to ADF, who sponsored a conference where the two met.
The new documents suggest that ADF鈥檚 recruitment of dubious 鈥渆xperts鈥� began earlier than previously reported and, to an extent, anticipated the fight to interpret Title IX to include protections for transgender students. The documents also show that ACPeds appears to have recognized the request and eventually responded with a public statement and letter-writing campaign of its own, following ADF鈥檚 lead on messaging. Importantly, ACPeds purportedly offered a medical justification for an exclusionary interpretation of Title IX in accordance with ADF鈥檚 request.
In the 2014 鈥淭ransgender Research Request鈥� message, ADF asks ACPeds for several policy statements that 鈥渟ubstantiate鈥� the claim that 鈥減sychological harm鈥� especially 鈥渂efall[s] girls/women鈥� when their 鈥減rivacy鈥� is 鈥渋nvaded by males,鈥� and 鈥渟ubstantiate鈥� the idea that being transgender is a 鈥減hase鈥� and that 鈥渋nterpreting this common stage as gender identity confusion warrants treating a child as the opposite sex 鈥� and pursuing more drastic measures like 鈥� genital change surgery.鈥�
The request is consistent with both ADF鈥檚 anti-trans and its legal needs. In addition to brought by some against a trans-inclusive nondiscrimination law in Houston, Texas, ADF was leading the charge against gender-inclusive school nondiscrimination policies, helping challenge one as early . ADF attorneys would go on to testify and file amicus briefs, and ADF would file its own cases against 人兽性交+ nondiscrimination laws in public school districts 2015-17. ADF would also author model legislation banning trans students from school sports in of states.
Reflecting this context and ADF鈥檚 impending letters to school districts warning of potential litigation, the research requests asks if there is 鈥渁ny way to get the papers completed 鈥� by mid-November鈥� [2014], but it would be 鈥渆ven better鈥� if they could be done earlier.
The request also foreshadowed the direction of ADF鈥檚 legislative and legal strategy when it asked for policy statements to 鈥渟ubstantiate鈥� the claim that it is 鈥渋nappropriate鈥� and 鈥渃ould have harms鈥� to treat gender dysphoria in children with affirmation, and caregivers should instead ignore it as 鈥渁 phase.鈥� A document from a professional organization that reaches these conclusions, the request suggests, would help ADF 鈥渕ake the point that interpreting Title IX to include protections for 鈥榞ender identity鈥� [sic] will harm girls.鈥�
Throughout 2015 and 2016, ADF to send letters to and testify before local school districts warning 鈥渘o court鈥� had interpreted Title IX to include gender identity, and that school districts with nondiscrimination policies that included gender identity could open themselves to litigation. The group also took on clients to challenge local school districts鈥� adoption of trans-inclusive policies and challenged the Obama administration鈥檚 guidance for schools that included gender-identity protections under Title IX after it was in May 2016.
A review of ACPeds executive committee meeting minutes shows that at the fall 2014 board meeting, held Oct. 3-4 in Atlanta, Georgia, Dr. Cretella was assigned an 鈥渁ction item鈥� to 鈥渃ooperate with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) on joint statement concerning transgender use of restrooms in schools.鈥� A statement titled 鈥淪ex-Segregated Bathroom and Locker Room Access is Best for Children鈥� eventually appeared on ACPeds鈥� website in the spring of 2016. In the short statement, however, ACPeds offered no medical evidence for why transgender people should be barred from using bathrooms that match their gender identity.
At the February 2016 board meeting in Houston, Texas, the minutes note the organization sent letters and a fact sheet about gender dysphoria to state legislatures, school districts and 鈥渟everal grassroots organizations鈥� in Alabama, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota and Virginia.
In a publicly available version of a letter titled 鈥淎 Medical Response to DOE & DOJ Guidance for Schools鈥� and dated after the Obama administration issued Title IX guidance, Cretella cites Dr. Kenneth Zucker and sexologist J. Michael Bailey to argue that neither gender-affirming care nor claiming 鈥済ender identity is the equivalent of sex as codified in Title IX鈥� have any 鈥渂asis in science.鈥� 鈥淗uman sexuality is binary by design,鈥� the letter claims, while 鈥渁ll medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm 鈥� are rightly recognized as disorders of human design.鈥� Gender identity, ACPeds insists, does not 鈥渃omprise a third sex鈥� and is, therefore, not protected under Title IX.
One case, known as Doe v. Boyertown Area School District, illustrates how ADF鈥檚 request for research and ACPeds鈥� production of that research are packaged as part of ADF鈥檚 legal campaign against 人兽性交+ rights. The Boyertown case began in August 2016, when 鈥楯oel Doe鈥� started high school in the Boyertown, Pennsylvania, school district. Because the district previously adopted a 鈥渘arrow鈥� policy 鈥� consistent with from the American Academy of Pediatrics 鈥� to allow trans students to use restrooms and locker rooms consistent with their gender identity, ADF and the Independence Law Center filed suit on behalf of Doe to block the policy.
Among other claims, ADF鈥檚 suit argued that Title IX 鈥渆xplicitly emphasizes the binary view of sex, not 鈥榞ender identity,鈥� [sic] which is nonbinary鈥� to support its assertion that Title IX should not be interpreted to protect trans students. ADF lost the case, although the group appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to review a lower court ruling, leaving the policy in place.
As the case made its way to the Supreme Court, ACPeds leaders including Van Meter and Van Mol filed an amicus brief in support of Doe and ADF鈥檚 legal theory. The brief cites other ACPeds thought leaders including Cretella and Zucker and claims 鈥済ender affirming policies generally harm, rather than help, gender dysphoric children.鈥� The brief repeats characterizations from ADF鈥檚 2014 request by equating transgender identity to 鈥渁 bit of play-acting,鈥� claiming that transgender people are 鈥渋mpersonating鈥� the opposite sex, and insinuating that nondiscrimination policies will result in a rash of transgender kids pursuing 鈥渄rastic medical courses鈥� like 鈥渟urgical interventions.鈥�
Van Meter and Van Mol鈥檚 2018 amicus brief was attorney Parker Douglas, who worked with ADF in 2018 on the case, which sought to end employment discrimination protections for transgender people. Other show Douglas was later employed directly by ADF. Minutes from the ACPeds April 2019 board meeting confirm the brief, and a separate brief in the case of Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County (Florida), were filed as part of ADF鈥檚 and ACPeds鈥� campaign 鈥渁gainst pro-transgender bathroom, locker room, and sports policy.鈥�
Activism without oversight? ACPeds policy statements and amicus briefs
Not long after ACPeds issued its public affirmation of 鈥渟ex-segregated bathrooms,鈥� in August 2016, the group issued a policy statement titled 鈥淕ender Dysphoria in Children鈥� and an accompanying blog post claiming that 鈥済ender ideology harms children.鈥� Neither the policy statement nor the blog post mention Title IX. However, they use language about binary gender identity and threats of surgical escalation that is similar to ACPeds鈥� previous school board letter.
Policy statements and amicus briefs are major tools used by ACPeds in their campaign to co-op the language of science to promote anti-人兽性交+ ideology. On its website, ACPeds currently lists 66 policy statements and nearly three dozen amicus curiae briefs it filed, some with the help of the anti-人兽性交+ groups Liberty Counsel and ADF, in cases opposing same-sex adoption and marriage, a case brought by ADF that argues professors have a constitutional right to misgender students, and other cases opposing abortion and nondiscrimination protections for 人兽性交+ students in public schools.
ACPeds compares its practice of producing policy statements to the American Academy of Pediatrics, saying both groups 鈥渆mploy similar first steps in producing a policy.鈥� Although the American Academy of Pediatrics notes their policy statements are , including an evidentiary review and submission to multiple groups of peer reviewers before being weighed by the group鈥檚 board, ACPeds鈥� process includes only evaluation by a 鈥渟mall committee鈥� known internally as the Scientific Policy Committee. Then, provided three-quarters of the ACPeds 鈥渆xecutive committee鈥� supports a statement, it is 鈥減assed and published.鈥�
Whereas the group鈥檚 policy statements receive at least a nominal committee review, journalists Madison Pauly and Emma Rindlisbacher previously that amicus briefs were typically the sole purview of the former executive director, Michelle Cretella. Others have reported that under scientific scrutiny, ACPeds鈥� amicus briefs have been for scientific findings and data to fit conservative, anti-人兽性交+ and anti-abortion narratives.
The documents reviewed by Hatewatch also suggest that ACPeds understood that ADF was willing to subsidize its anti-人兽性交+ policy advocacy, giving ACPeds a potential financial motive for complying with ADF鈥檚 anti-trans research requests. Minutes from the spring 2019 board meeting and executive committee conference calls show Cretella met with a senior attorney at ADF to solicit a $15,000 grant for a 鈥渨hite paper鈥� that 鈥渞efutes鈥� the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care 7 鈥� a document that provides best practices for treating trans and gender non-conforming patients. The minutes suggest that ACPeds knew the white paper could be used in future ADF litigation and that ADF was 鈥渨illing to fund鈥� the project.
ADF continues its efforts to challenge inclusive education practices as well as trans-inclusive school sports, gender-affirming healthcare, and abortion rights. ACPeds continues to help. In June 2019, the ACPeds executive board entertained a request for an amicus brief from ADF supporting the claim that 鈥渟ex is innate and immutable.鈥� The minutes show the request would overlap with a position paper, authored by Cretella and ACPeds鈥� current president Michael Artigues, titled 鈥淪ex is a Biological Trait of Medical Significance.鈥� In 2020, filed an amicus brief for ACPeds in an ADF case called Meriwether v. Trustees of Shawnee State University , which discusses the importance of 鈥渟ex鈥� to medical science.
Both Artigues鈥� position paper and the brief use language directly from ADF鈥檚 request, as recounted in the 2019 conference call, to argue that unlike sex, gender identity is not 鈥渋nnate鈥� and 鈥渋mmutable.鈥� In its brief, ACPeds argues a pseudoscientific case in support of ADF鈥檚 client by claiming gender identity is an ideological 鈥渇light from reality鈥� that 鈥渢hreaten[s] the integrity of science and medicine.鈥� ADF subsequently 聽the case.
Similarly, in 2021, ADF filed a lawsuit on behalf of ACPeds against Xavier Becerra, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, using the same incendiary clams that gender affirmation will lead to 鈥渄rastic鈥� escalations in medical care that ADF first requested of ACPeds in 2014. Namely, the suit claims the department鈥檚 interpretation of nondiscrimination provisions of the Affordable Care Act 鈥渞equire gender transition 鈥� surgeries and drugs on demand, even for children, no matter a doctor鈥檚 medical judgment.鈥� A federal district court in Tennessee dismissed the case in November 2022. ADF filed a notice of appeal in January.
(Editor's note:聽An earlier version of this story misidentified the founder of ACPeds as Kenneth Zucker. The founder is Joseph Zanga. We regret the error.)
Photo illustration by 人兽性交 (L-R Alan Sears, Jeremy Tedesco and Michelle Cretella)
