Connect with us

National

16 Democratic senators uncommitted on ENDA

Despite uncertainties, House to forge ahead on job bias bill

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank said ENDA supporters should ‘call senators and lobby them’ to help build momentum for the bill in the Senate. (Photo by Joe Tresh)

With supporters of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act expecting a favorable House vote on the measure in May or June, LGBT lobbyists are turning their attention to 16 Democratic senators who have yet to sign on as co-sponsors of the legislation.

The bill, also known as ENDA, bars employment discrimination based on someone’s actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity.

Its supporters say it’s needed to end job discrimination in 29 states, where it remains legal to fire or refuse to hire someone who’s gay, lesbian or bisexual. Supporters also note that employers in 38 states can fire or refuse to hire someone solely because of their gender identity or expression, a practice the bill would similarly prohibit.

Multiple sources have told DC Agenda that supporters in the Senate don’t appear to have the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster that Republican opponents are expected to invoke to block an up or down floor vote.

“I’ve tried to get a sense of what’s going on here,” said Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), ENDA’s lead sponsor in the House. “But I think the best thing I can do about the Senate and ENDA is to get it passed [in the House] and send it over there.”

Frank’s advice for ENDA backers worried about the Senate is to “call senators and lobby them” rather than dwell too much on “arm chair strategizing.”

But with the 2010 congressional elections fast approaching, only two GOP senators have so far committed to vote for ENDA, making it essential for supporters to line up most of the 16 uncommitted Democrats to secure the bill’s passage in the Senate.

Nearly all political observers predict the Democrats’ majorities in the House and Senate will shrink as a result of the November election, making it far more difficult to pass ENDA and other LGBT rights bills next year.

As of this week, there were 45 Senate co-sponsors of ENDA, along with chief sponsor Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), bringing the total committed votes to 46. Of the 46, 42 are Democrats and two are independents. Maine senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are the only Senate Republicans that have signed on as co-sponsors.

Thirty-nine Republican senators have declined to co-sponsor the bill compared to the 16 Democrats who chose not to become a co-sponsor. Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) signed on as a co-sponsor on March 10, reducing the number of uncommitted Democrats from 17 to 16.

For the first of a series of reports on the Democratic senators uncommitted on ENDA, DC Agenda contacted experts and activists in the states that five of those senators represent, seeking to assess how they would vote if the measure reaches the Senate floor sometime this year.

The five senators include Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Thomas Carper (D-Del.), Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), and Clare McCaskill (D-Mo.). Spokespeople for the five did not return calls this week seeking to determine their position on ENDA.

Many political observers in Arkansas believe Lincoln is facing an uphill fight in her re-election bid, with the state’s lieutenant governor, Bill Halter, challenging her in the Democratic primary. As of April 1, each of four Republicans seeking the nomination to oppose her in the general election was ahead of her in a Rasmussen public opinion poll by margins of 51 percent to 36 percent.

Officials with the state’s sole statewide LGBT group, Center for Artistic Revolution, did not respond to calls for comment by press time.

Hastings Wyman, editor of Southern Political Report, a recognized authority on politics and elections in the South, said support for ENDA would not help Lincoln in the current political environment.

“I can’t say how she would vote on ENDA, but the politics would say it would help her if she did not vote for it,” he said.

Wyman noted that Pryor, who is not up for re-election this year, has a record as a moderate on most issues, even though he projects an image of a conservative Democrat.

“I would not be surprised if he voted for it,” he said.

Steve Elkins, executive director of Camp Rehoboth, an LGBT advocacy group and community center in Rehoboth Beach, Del., said he has spoken with Carper at gay-related events and believes the state’s senior senator would vote for ENDA.

“He has been to Camp Rehoboth and has attended a number of LGBT events,” including meetings of the state’s LGBT Democratic group, Stonewall Democrats of Delaware, Elkins said. “There is no reason for me to think he would not vote for the bill.”

Delaware’s other senator, Democrat Ted Kaufman, who was appointed to fill the Senate seat vacated when former Sen. Joe Biden was elected vice president, is an ENDA co-sponsor.

By comparison, Indiana political consultant Mark St. John, a member of the board of the statewide LGBT group Indiana Equality, said Bayh has a longstanding reputation as a cautious politician and has yet to give any indication of how he would vote on ENDA.

“I wish I had a better answer,” he said. “Evan is certainly Mr. Cautious on that issue … but this is not to say he would vote no on ENDA. He has always held his cards close to his chest.”

St. John said Indiana Equality is lobbying Bayh to support both ENDA and a proposal to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the law that bars gays, lesbians and bisexuals from serving openly in the military.

Although McCaskill’s office has not responded to at least two inquiries from DC Agenda seeking her position on ENDA, A.J. Bockelman, executive director of the Missouri statewide LGBT group Promo, said McCaskill told members of the group at a meeting in Kansas City in February that she supports ENDA and would vote for it.

“We have talked to her office about the trans provisions in the bill and she is OK with that,” Bockelman said.

Sources familiar with ENDA have said several senators and House members raised objections to the transgender provision, a development that prompted Frank to work with transgender activists to come up with proposed revisions in the bill’s language pertaining to gender identity. The changes are expected to be disclosed when the House version of the bill is marked up in committee in late April or early May.

“Everyone signed off on the changes,” said one transgender activist, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “We’re not crazy about them, but they’re acceptable and they’ll help us get the bill passed.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports

27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.

In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”

In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.

The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.

“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.

He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”

“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”

Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”

Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House

University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

Published

on

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Screen capture: C-SPAN)

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”

The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.

“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”

Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”

Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”

“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”

Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.

Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.

The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.

Continue Reading

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

Popular