As Mr. Abbott described in his letter, the order would mean that “all licensed professionals who have direct contact with children” will be required to report to state authorities anyone they believe is undergoing gender-affirming treatment or is subject to criminal punishment.

Updated

March 1, 2022 12:47 pm ET

In a lawsuit Tuesday, the Texas ACLU and Lambda Legal, an advocacy organization focused on the LGBTQ community, sought to block a request for medical records in an employee’s case and, more broadly, challenged the legitimacy of the investigation and the governor’s power to change the definition of child abuse. According to the materials of the case, other investigations have also been launched.

The groups allege in the lawsuit that the governor’s directive was improperly issued under state law, was contrary to the Texas constitution, and violated the constitutional rights of transgender youth as well as their parents.

“No family should fear being separated because they support their transgender child,” Adri Perez, Texas ACLU political strategist, said in a statement. “In the week leading up to the election, Governor Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton launched a biased political attack that is not based on the needs of families.”

Dr. Megan Mooney, a licensed psychologist in Houston, is also a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Dr. Mooney, who is required to report suspected child abuse by Texas law, has a practice that includes transgender patients, many of whom, according to the lawsuit, have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

The actions of Mr. Abbott and Mr. Paxton, two-term Republicans, came just days before the primary, in which they each face significant and high-profile challenges from far-right opponents. Mr. Paxton, who had been charged with securities fraud and corruption by his own former top aides, was seen as particularly vulnerable. Entering Tuesday’s primary, he looks unlikely to get more than 50 percent of the vote and is likely to make it to the runoff in May.

Paul Castillo, Senior Counsel at Lambda Legal, said in a statement that Mr. Abbott and Mr. Paxton were “joining a politically motivated disinformation campaign without regard to medical science and appear determined to prosecute parents who want to care for and provide for their children.” “, adding that “gender-affirming care for the treatment of gender dysphoria is medically necessary care, period.”

the Russian invasion of Ukraine raised concerns about the president’s mental stability Vladimir Putin.

The brazen act of war, along with maniacal speeches on the state media, has convinced analysts that the Russian dictator is acting irrationally.

His order for Russia’s nuclear deterrence to be put on high alert and his implicit threat from nuclear war if the West intervenes in the invasion of Ukraine, it even seemingly shocks its own military personnel.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has raised concerns about President Vladimir Putin’s mental stability

As the stakes increase and the West puts pressure on the Russian economy, the chances of Putin being ousted by coup are becoming more likely.

But could Ukraine’s next president be even worse than Putin? MailOnline is looking at some of the tyrant’s potential substitutes.

Sergei Shoigu (Minister of Defense)

Shoigu is “Russia’s second most popular politician” after Vladimir Putin.

Chadan’s defense minister in eastern Russia played an important role in organizing the invasion of Ukraine, but was caught on camera after Putin ordered him and army commander Valery Gerasimov to put Russia’s nuclear deterrent on high alert. .

Shoigu took over the role, despite having no military experience in 2012, and chaired the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Chadan’s defense minister, in eastern Russia, played an important role in organizing the invasion of Ukraine, but was caught on camera after Putin ordered him and Army Chief Valery Gerasimov to put Russia’s nuclear deterrent on high. combat readiness.

Reports say Shoigu is considered Russia’s greatest military leader after Georgi Zhukov, the general who defeated Nazi Germany in World War II.

His rise to power would be complicated by his continued involvement in the invasion of Ukraine, although he is said to be more pragmatic than Putin, which could mean withdrawing from the country in a way that could thaw relations with the West.

Vera Tolz-Zilitinkevich, a professor of Russian at the University of Manchester, told MailOnline: “He is a very, very powerful man at the moment. He is again seen as a pragmatist, in a way they are all better than Putin.

She warned: “The circumstances in which we speak when Putin is replaced are obviously circumstances in which when [the Russian army] he had lost [in Ukraine].

“So Shoigu is considered to be directly involved in organizing this campaign, and that could work against him.”

Nikolay Patrushev (Secretary of the Security Council)

Patrushev is the former head of the FSB, the successor to the formidable Soviet KGB spy agency.

The Secretary of the Security Council is said to share the conspiratorial view of the world shared by former FSB chief Putin.

Security Council Secretary General allegedly shares conspiratorial opinion, former FSB chief Putin

The United Kingdom has found in an investigation that Patrushev most likely ordered the poisoning of former dissident agent Alexander Litvinenko with polonium on British soil in 2006.

While he was head of the FSB, the United Kingdom found in an investigation that Patrushev most likely ordered the poisoning of former dissident agent Alexander Litvinenko with polonium on British soil in 2006.

He said he believed the United States was “rather Russia does not exist at all.”

Prof. Tolz-Zilitinkevich said: “The association with the FSB is a very strong negative.

“You can see under Putin and many intelligence officers around the world, even in democracies, they have a conspiratorial worldview, which is not very useful if you are the leader of a country.

‘[Patrushev is] pretty bad choice. But it is an opportunity.

“He has a paranoid worldview that the world wants to catch him and he needs to uncover potential threats.”

Valeri Gerasimov (Chief of the Army)

Gerasimov has headed the Russian military since 2012, when he was appointed by Putin.

He is the strategist who created the Gerasimov Doctrine, which combines economic, cultural, informational and military tactics to achieve strategic goals for Russia.

This includes Russian action over the past two decades, such as interference in the 2016 US presidential election and Russia’s successful bid to host the 2014 Winter Olympics and the 2018 FIFA World Cup.

Gerasimov is the strategist who created the “Gerasimov Doctrine”, which combines economic, cultural, informational and military tactics to achieve strategic goals for Russia.

The general is another who will have to overcome his involvement in the invasion of Ukraine to succeed Putin.

Prof. Tolz-Zilitinkevich said that as long as the military puts him in charge after a coup, it is possible – Putin’s removal is much more likely to come from the political elite.

Russian history shows that the military is not usually involved in regime change, according to a professor of Russian studies.

She said: “Historically, not only today, the military is under very strict control of the political elite.

Prof. Tolz-Zilitinkevich added that even in the case of Nikita Khrushchev’s maniacal decision-making in the early 1960s, political elites removed him from power.

Dmitry Medvedev (Deputy Chairman of the Security Council and former President)

Medvedev was Russia’s president between 2008 and 2012, after Putin’s second term, and now holds the post of deputy chairman of the Security Council.

The St. Petersburg-born lawyer was elected with a promise to make Putin his prime minister, which he fulfilled immediately.

When Putin regained power in 2012, he returned the favor, giving Medvedev the role of prime minister.

Medvedev served for eight years before he and his government resigned in the Duma to clear the way for Vladimir Putin to make radical constitutional changes.

Although he has experience with the presidency, St. Petersburg’s Medvedev is not considered a threat from Putin, experts say

These changes include reversing the conditions Putin has already met and allowing him to hold on to power until 2034.

Although he has experience with the presidency, the St. Petersburg lawyer is not considered a threat from Putin, according to experts.

The very fact that Putin has entrusted him to be interim president suggests that Medvedev is not considered strong enough to challenge the dictator’s leadership.

Prof. Tolz-Zilitinkevich said: “The situation will be exceptional if Putin is removed and Russia will be on the verge of complete collapse.

“I do not think the elites would choose someone who is generally as weak as Medvedev.

“When he was president, liberalism was not the word, but within this system his instincts were quite liberal.

“He comes from a kind of family of liberal intelligentsia in St. Petersburg. He is not a strong politician. He is nobody.

Mikhail Mishustin (Prime Minister)

Russia’s current prime minister took office just before the Covid pandemic began and was appointed after Medvedev’s resignation.

The former tax police officer would satisfy a number of groups in the Kremlin and in Russia itself.

Former tax police officer Mishustin will satisfy a number of groups in the Kremlin and in Russia itself

The Moscow-born politician embarked on a popular tour of Russia to assess living conditions and support regional development before Covid interrupted the tour.

Prof. Tolz-Zilitinkevich noted: “It would satisfy many different groups in the country.

– In terms of the system, it is quite good.

Tuesday’s Texas primary marked the first test of a sweeping statewide law that added new voting restrictions and threatened to prevent some voters’ absentee ballot count.

On Tuesday morning, there were no major reports of long lines or outside groups threatening or intimidating voters as a steady, albeit small, tide of voters cast their votes.

Early voting in the primaries was in line with previous midterm primaries. About 9 percent of registered voters voted early in the state’s 15 most populous counties, nearly equal to the number of early voters in the 2018 midterm primaries, according to data from the Texas Secretary of State’s office.

But both the rejection of absentee ballots and the return of ballots found to be defective increased sharply during the early voting period. Approximately 30 percent of ballots received were rejected in the state’s most populous counties almost exclusively because new rules required voters to put their driver’s license number or partial social security number on their ballot. In the 2020 election, the state’s overall rejection rate was below 1 percent.

The high number of absentee ballot rejections cast doubt on Texas Republican claims that the new voting law makes “voting easier and harder to cheat.” The law also includes new provisions that expand the autonomy of party poll monitors, increase criminal penalties for poll workers, and ban new voting methods pioneered in the 2020 elections, including pass-through voting and round-the-clock voting.

Guide to Texas Elementary Schools

The 2022 midterm elections will begin with the state’s primary on March 1.

These provisions are unlikely to face a real test in Tuesday’s primary. A low turnout in the primaries puts less strain on the electoral system.

Absentee voting in Texas represents a small portion of the electorate, as only those over the age of 65 or those with good cause can vote absentee by mail. The key question, which still remains unanswered, is how many rejected ballots will be corrected – or corrected, as election officials call it – and eventually counted.

But the new ballot correction process, which was passed as a separate law from the sweeping election revision, has also been hampered by confusion. Some voters were unsure about the exact timeframe for correcting their ballots and whether those ballots could be corrected by mail or in person.

Turnout in Texas primaries is often low and may not be an accurate indicator of turnout in November’s general election. However, what appeared to be a low turnout early in the day on Tuesday was a sign that the 2020 voting bonanza may not last until 2022.

More than 11.3 million Texas voters cast their ballots in the 2020 presidential election, up 10 percent from 2016, in a state that has often lagged behind the bottom of the country in voter turnout. The surge was at least partly driven by a surge in early voting as eligible voters opted for mail-in voting and others flocked to early in-person voting as a means to vote safely during the pandemic.

Democrats and civil rights groups have argued that the new law passed by Republicans in the Texas Legislature was designed in part in response to a surge in turnout and changing voter behavior during the pandemic, especially as more Democrats embrace mail-in voting. .

Early voting rates are difficult to compare with previous years. This year’s election marked the first time the Secretary of State released early voting data for all of Texas’ 254 midterm primaries. Previously, the state only tracked the 15 most populous counties.

The United States and its allies are releasing 60 million barrels of oil from their strategic reserves after crude oil jumped to a nine-year high amid Russian invasion of Ukraine.

All 31 countries that are members of the International Energy Agency have agreed to publish “to send a strong message to the oil markets” that “there will be no shortage of supplies” as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the group said on Tuesday.

Oil prices rose even higher after the announcement, with WTI reaching $ 106 for 10% profit during the day, as investors seemed disappointed that the strategic edition was no bigger. It marked the highest price for WTI since January 2011.

Approximately half of the coordinated release will come from the United States, which has a strategic stockpile of about 580 million barrels held in deep underground storage caves set up in salt domes along the Texas and Louisiana the shores of the Persian Gulf.

The IEA Board took its decision at an extraordinary meeting of energy ministers, chaired by US Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm.

The strategic oil reserve in Freeport, Texas can be seen in a photo from a file. The United States and its allies are releasing 60 million barrels of oil from their strategic reserves

Oil prices rose even higher after the announcement, with WTI reaching $ 106 for 10% profit during the day. It marked the highest price for WTI since January 2011.

In addition to the United States, other members include the United States, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Canada.

Previous emergency oil spills

1991: Release of 17.3 million barrels to minimize market disruption during the Gulf War following Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

2005: Release of 60 million barrels due to disruption of supplies from Hurricane Katrina.

2011: Release of 60 million barrels due to interruptions in Libya and other countries.

IAEA members have emergency reserves of 1.5 billion barrels of oil. The release amounts to 4 percent of the stock, or approximately 2 million barrels per day for 30 days.

It takes approximately 13 days for US strategic reserve oil to hit the market with the president’s permission.

“The situation in the energy markets is very serious and requires our full attention,” said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol. “Global energy security is under threat, putting the global economy at risk during a fragile phase of recovery.”

Russia plays a huge role in world energy markets as the third largest oil producer.

Its exports of 5 million barrels per day of crude oil, which accounts for about 12 percent of world oil trade. About 60 percent goes to Europe and another 20 percent to China.

The decision came after oil prices rose on Tuesday, with US crude crude exceeding $ 100 a barrel for its highest price since 2014.

The conflict in Ukraine has shaken global markets and added to concerns about economic growth amid rising inflation and central banks’ plans to raise interest rates.

This is only the fourth time in history that the IEA has made a coordinated withdrawal since the reserves were established after the 1974 Arab oil embargo.

Previous emergency communications were in 1991 during the Gulf War, in 2005 after Hurricane Katrina and in 2011 amid US intervention in the Libyan civil war.

Drivers past a gas station in Los Angeles last week. California has the highest gas prices in the United States, with regular gasoline averaging $ 4,827 a gallon

Rising oil prices have already raised the price of gasoline for Americans. For every $ 10 increase in oil prices, gas rises by about 20 cents

In November, US President Joe Biden announced the release of 50 million barrels of oil in coordination with several other energy-importing countries, but the measure had only a fleeting effect on rising oil prices.

On Tuesday, the global crude oil benchmark Brent rose $ 7.83 in April, or 8 percent, to $ 105.80 a barrel at 10.46 EST.

US Texas Crude Oil Intermediate (WTI) rose $ 8.27, or 8.6 percent, to $ 103.99 in April.

During the session, Brent oil reached its highest level since August 2014, and WTI reached its highest level since July 2014.

WTI is heading for its biggest daily percentage increase since May 2020, and Brent is heading for its biggest increase since August 2021.

The maximum values ​​of the session for American distillates and gasoline futures were also the highest since 2014.

“Oil is climbing the wall of Ukraine’s war of unrest,” said John Kildaff, a partner at Again Capital in New York.

American drivers see that the prices of gas stations are gradually rising due to rising oil prices. The map above shows which states have the highest average prices and which have the lowest

He said traders may have been disappointed that the IEA was seeking to release only about 60 million barrels of SPR instead of a larger release.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and other producers, including Russia, known as OPEC +, are due to meet on Wednesday.

“OPEC (+) is likely to stick to its initial plan for a monthly increase of 400,000 barrels per day (bpd), which will not allay fears,” said Tamas Varga of PVM Oil Associates.

Rising oil prices have already raised the price of gasoline for Americans. For every $ 10 increase in oil prices, gas rises by about 20 cents.

The average national price of unleaded gasoline reached $ 3.61 on Monday, eight cents more than the average of $ 3,532 a week ago.

In addition, it is 25 cents higher than the average of $ 3,356 a month ago and nearly 90 cents higher than the average of $ 2,717 a year ago, according to the AAA gas price index.

Californians are paying the highest prices, averaging $ 4,827 a gallon of unleaded gas since Monday, about eight cents more than the average of $ 4,741 a week ago.

That’s 19 cents from an average of $ 4,637 a month ago and $ 1.14 from last year’s $ 3,681, the AAA said.