Connect with us

National

Mikulski pressured to co-sponsor DOMA repeal

Petition of more than 3,000 names to be delivered Friday

Published

on

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (photo courtesy wikimedia)

The senior U.S. senator from Maryland is facing increasing pressure to sign on as a co-sponsor of legislation to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act amid plans to win marriage equality in her state in 2012.

A coalition of LGBT rights advocates ā€” made up of Courage Campaign, Freedom to Marry and Equality Maryland ā€” are building pressure on Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) to co-sponsor the Respect for Marriage Act by circulating a petition among Maryland residents asking her to support the bill.

MORE IN THE BLADE: SENATE PANEL APPROVES DOMA REPEAL LEGISLATION

As of Tuesday, organizers had collected more than 3,000 names for the petition encouraging Mikulski to voice support for the Respect for Marriage Act. LGBT rights advocates were set to deliver the petition to Mikulski’s Baltimore, Md., office on Friday.

LGBT rights advocates said Mikulski’s lack of co-sponsorship of the bill, which is sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), is particularly striking because other elected officials in her states have voiced support for same-sex marriage and because plans are in motion to legalize same-sex marriage in the state next year.

Rick Jacobs, chair of the Courage Campaign, said Mikulski’s support would be significant because she’s a leader of the Democratic Party and because it would align her with the movement toward marriage equality in Maryland.

“I think with Sen. [Benjamin] Cardin on board, and the governor on board and her state moving, I think it’s really important that she joins in,” Jacobs said. “I’m going to assume that her staff and she simply need education. I’m going to assume that. If several thousand of her constituents can help her provide that education, then that’s great. But beyond that it’s really time for Sen. Mikulski to join us.”

MORE IN THE BLADE: WHY DOES NOM BELIEVE DOMA WILL BE IN THE DEFENSE BILL?

Last month, Gov. Martin O’Malley announced he would push for the legalization of same-sex marriage in Maryland as part of his legislative package in 2012. The Maryland governor had been criticized for not taking a leadership role in the effort to legalize gay nuptials in his state this year.

Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, said O’Malley’s support indicates that Maryland is in the midst of a debate on same-sex marriage and said Mikulski’s co-sponsorship of the Respect for Marriage Act would show where she stands in the discussion.

“It’s important that Sen. Mikulski be on the right side of this deeply important matter of justice for families and the right side of history as well,” Wolfson said.

Additionally, Wolfson said Mikulski’s co-sponsorship would put her in a position to back same-sex couples in her state who are married or are seeking the right to marry.Ā While Maryland doesn’t offer same-sex marriage under state law, it recognizes such unions that are performed in other jurisdictions.

“As we’ve seen from the release on Census data and the snapshots provided by the Williams Institute and others, there are families in Maryland across the state who are harmed by the denial of marriage, and by federal discrimination against the marriages that they manage to celebrate right across the border in the District of Columbia as well as other states,” Wolfson said.

According to recent numbers published by the Williams Institute at the University of California in Los Angeles based on data from the 2010 U.S. Census, 16,987 same-sex couples live in Maryland and make up 7.88 couples in every 1,000 households.

Rachel MacKnight, a Mikulski spokesperson, said the senator is “very closely” looking at Feinstein’s legislation.

As long as the Senate is out of session for August recess, Mikulski is unable to sign on as a co-sponsor to the legislation. An informed source said the senator would make an announcement regarding her support for the Respect for Marriage Act in September.

Other members of the congressional delegation from Maryland have already signed on in support of the legislation. Cardin, the junior senator from Maryland, joined on as a co-sponsor in May. The legislation has a total of 28 co-sponsors in the Senate ā€” all Democrats.

In the House, where Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) sponsors companion legislation, Reps. John Sarbanes, Donna Edwards and Chris Van Hollen as well as House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer have become co-sponsors. The House legislation has 120 co-sponsors in total.

Lisa Polyak, acting board chair for Equality Maryland, said support from Mikulski would “round out the complement” of statewide elected officials in Maryland who’ve voiced support for same-sex marriage.

“She’s the only one at this time who doesn’t, both at the state and federal level,” Polyak said. “I think there’s really no reason for her not to support it. Public opinion polls are there. She’s shown herself to be a progressive senator on other issues, and I think this fits easily within the types of issues that she’s supported in the past for women and family and children.”

Other members of the congressional delegation from Maryland have yet to sign on in support of the Respect for Marriage Act. They include Democratic Reps. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger and Elijah Cummings. Republican House members Roscoe Bartlett and Andrew Harris also aren’t DOMA repeal co-sponsors. Bartlett has voiced opposition to same-sex marriage and has voted for a U.S. constitutional amendment restricting marriage to one man, one woman.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified Rep. Andrew Harris (R-Md.) as a Democrat. The Blade regrets the error.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

US Supreme Court rules Idaho to enforce gender care ban

House Bill 71 signed in 2023

Published

on

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

BY MIA MALDONADO | The U.S. Supreme Court has allowed Idaho to enforce House Bill 71, a law banning Idaho youth from receiving gender-affirming care medications and surgeries.

In an opinion issued Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the state of Idahoā€™s request to stay the preliminary injunction, which blocked the law from taking effect. This means the preliminary injunction now only applies to the plaintiffs involved in Poe v. Labrador ā€” a lawsuit brought on by the families of two transgender teens in Idaho who seek gender-affirming care. 

Mondayā€™s Supreme Court decision enforces the gender-affirming care ban for all other trans youth in Idaho as the lawsuitĀ remains ongoing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Idaho Attorney General RaĆŗl Labrador
Idaho Attorney General RaĆŗl Labrador gives a speech at the Idaho GOP election night watch party at the Grove Hotel in Boise, Idaho, on Nov. 8, 2022. (Otto Kitsinger for Idaho Capital Sun)

The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Idaho, both of whom represent the plaintiffs, said in a press release Monday that the ruling ā€œdoes not touch upon the constitutionalityā€ of HB 71. The groups called Mondayā€™s ruling an ā€œawful resultā€ for trans Idaho youth and their families.

ā€œTodayā€™s ruling allows the state to shut down the care that thousands of families rely on while sowing further confusion and disruption,ā€ the organizations said in the press release. ā€œNonetheless, todayā€™s result only leaves us all the more determined to defeat this law in the courts entirely, making Idaho a safer state to raise every family.ā€

Idaho Attorney General RaĆŗl Labrador in a press release said the state has a duty to protect and support all children, and that he is proud of the stateā€™s legal stance. 

ā€œThose suffering from gender dysphoria deserve love, support and medical care rooted in biological reality,ā€ Labrador said. ā€œDenying the basic truth that boys and girls are biologically different hurts our kids. No one has the right to harm children, and Iā€™m grateful that we, as the state, have the power ā€” and duty ā€” to protect them.ā€

Recap of Idahoā€™s HB 71, and what led to SCOTUS opinion

Mondayā€™s Supreme Court decision traces back to when HB 71 was signed into law in April 2023.

The law makes it a felony punishable for up to 10 years for doctors to provide surgeries, puberty-blockers and hormones to trans people under the age of 18. However, gender-affirming surgeries are not and were not performed among Idaho adults or youth before the bill was signed into law, the Idaho Capital Sun previously reported

One month afterĀ it was signed into law, the families of two trans teens sued the state in a lawsuit alleging the bill violates the 14th Amendmentā€™s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

In late December, just days before the law was set to take effect in the new year, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill blocked the law from taking effect under a preliminary injunction. In his decision, he said he found the families likely to succeed in their challenge.

The state of Idaho responded by appealing the district courtā€™s preliminary injunction decision to the Ninth Circuit, to which the Ninth Circuit denied. The state of Idaho argued the court should at least enforce the ban for everyone except for the plaintiffs. 

After the Ninth Circuitā€™s denial, the Idaho Attorney Generalā€™s Office in February sent an emergency motion to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Idaho Press reported. Mondayā€™s U.S. Supreme Court decision agrees with the stateā€™s request to enforce its ban on trans health care for minors, except for the two plaintiffs.

******************************************************************************************

Mia Maldonado

Mia Maldonado joined the Idaho Capital Sun after working as a breaking news reporter at the Idaho Statesman covering stories related to crime, education, growth and politics. She previously interned at the Idaho Capital Sun through the Voces Internship of Idaho, an equity-driven program for young Latinos to work in Idaho news. Born and raised in Coeur d’Alene, Mia moved to the Treasure Valley for college where she graduated from the College of Idaho with a bachelor’s degree in Spanish and international political economy.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding piece was previously published by the Idaho Capital Sun and is republished with permission.

The Idaho Capital Sun is the Gem Stateā€™s newest nonprofit news organization delivering accountability journalism on state politics, health care, tax policy, the environment and more.

Weā€™re part of States Newsroom, the nationā€™s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

Continue Reading

Kansas

Kansas governor vetoes ban on health care for transgender youth

Republican lawmakers have vowed to override veto

Published

on

Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed two abortion bills and a measure criminalizing transgender health care for minors. House and Senate Republican leaders responded with promises to seek veto overrides when the full Legislature returned to Topeka on April 26. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)

BY TIM CARPENTERĀ | Gov. Laura Kelly flexed a veto pen to reject bills Friday prohibiting gender identity health care for transgender youth, introducing a vague crime of coercing someone to have an abortion and implementing a broader survey of women seeking abortion that was certain to trigger veto override attempts in the Republican-led House and Senate.

The decisions by the Democratic governor to use her authority to reject these health and abortion rights bills didnā€™t come as a surprise given her previous opposition to lawmakers intervening in personal decisions that she believed ought to remain the domain of families and physicians.

Kelly saidĀ Senate Bill 233, which would ban gender-affirming care for trans minors in Kansas, was an unwarranted attack on a small number of Kansans under 18. She said the bill was based on a politically distorted belief the Legislature knew better than parents how to raise their children.

She said it was neither a conservative nor Kansas value to block medical professionals from performing surgery or prescribing puberty blockers for their patients. She said stripping doctors of their licenses for serving health interests of patients was wrong. Under the bill, offending physicians could be face lawsuits and their professional liability insurance couldnā€™t be relied on to defend themselves in court.

ā€œTo be clear, this legislation tramples parental rights,ā€ Kelly said. ā€œThe last place that I would want to be as a politician is between a parent and a child who needed medical care of any kind. And, yet, that is exactly what this legislation does.ā€

Senate President Ty Masterson (R-Andover) and House Speaker Dan Hawkins (R-Wichita) responded to the governor by denouncing the vetoes and pledging to seek overrides when legislators returned to the Capitol on April 26. The trans bill was passed 27-13 in the Senate and 82-39 in the House, suggesting both chambers were in striking distance of a two-thirds majority necessary to thwart the governor.

ā€œThe governor has made it clear yet again that the radical left controls her veto pen,ā€ Masterson said. ā€œThis devotion to extremism will not stand, and we look forward to overriding her vetoes when we return in two weeks.ā€

Cathryn Oakley, senior director of the Human Rights Campaign, said the ban on crucial, medically necessary health care for trans youth was discriminatory, designed to spread dangerous misinformation and timed to rile up anti-LGBTQ activists.

ā€œEvery credible medical organization ā€” representing over 1.3 million doctors in the United States ā€” calls for age-appropriate, gender-affirming care for transgender and nonbinary people,ā€ Oakley said. ā€œThis is why majorities of Americans oppose criminalizing or banning gender-affirming care.ā€

Abortion coercion

Kelly also vetoed House Bill 2436 that would create the felony crime of engaging in physical, financial or documentary coercion to compel a girl or woman to end a pregnancy despite an expressed desire to carry the fetus to term. It was approved 27-11 in the Senate and 82-37 in the House, again potentially on the cusp of achieving a veto override.

The legislation would establish sentences of one year in jail and $5,000 fine for those guilty of abortion coercion. The fine could be elevated to $10,000 if the adult applying the pressure was the fetusesā€™ father and the pregnant female was under 18. If the coercion was accompanied by crimes of stalking, domestic battery, kidnapping or about 20 other offenses the prison sentence could be elevated to 25 years behind bars.

Kelly said no one should be forced to undergo a medical procedure against their will. She said threatening violence against another individual was already a crime in Kansas.

ā€œAdditionally, I am concerned with the vague language in this bill and its potential to intrude upon private, often difficult, conversations between a person and their family, friends and health care providers,ā€ the governor said. ā€œThis overly broad language risks criminalizing Kansans who are being confided in by their loved ones or simply sharing their expertise as a health care provider.ā€

Hawkins, the House Republican leader, said coercion was wrong regardless of the circumstances and Kellyā€™s veto of the bill was a step too far to the left.

ā€œItā€™s a sad day for Kansas when the governorā€™s uncompromising support for abortion wonā€™t even allow her to advocate for trafficking and abuse victims who are coerced into the procedure,ā€ Hawkins said.

Emily Wales, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes, said HB 2436 sought to equate abortion with crime, perpetuate false narratives and erode a fundamental constitutional right to bodily autonomy. The bill did nothing to protect Kansas from reproductive coercion, including forced pregnancy or tampering with birth control.

ā€œPlanned Parenthood Great Plains Votes trusts patients and stands firmly against any legislation that seeks to undermine reproductive rights or limit access to essential health care services,ā€ Wales said.

Danielle Underwood, spokeswoman for Kansas for Life, said ā€œCoercion Kellyā€ demonstrated with this veto a lack of compassion for women pushed into an abortion.

The abortion survey

The House and Senate approved a bill requiring more than a dozen questions be added to surveys of women attempting to terminate a pregnancy in Kansas. Colorful debate in the House included consideration of public health benefits of requiring interviews of men about reasons they sought a vasectomy birth control procedure or why individuals turned to health professionals for treatment of erectile dysfunction.

House Bill 2749 adopted 81-39 in the House and 27-13 in the Senate would require the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to produce twice-a-year reports on responses to the expanded abortion survey. The state of Kansas cannot require women to answer questions on the survey.

Kelly said in her veto message the bill was ā€œinvasive and unnecessaryā€ and legislators should have taken into account rejection in August 2022 of a proposed amendment to the Kansas Constitution that would have set the stage for legislation further limiting or ending access to abortion.

ā€œThere is no valid medical reason to force a woman to disclose to the Legislature if they have been a victim of abuse, rape or incest prior to obtaining an abortion,ā€ Kelly said. ā€œThere is also no valid reason to force a woman to disclose to the Legislature why she is seeking an abortion. I refuse to sign legislation that goes against the will of the majority of Kansans who spoke loudly on Aug. 2, 2022. Kansans donā€™t want politicians involved in their private medical decisions.ā€

Wales, of Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes, said the bill would have compelled health care providers to ā€œinterrogate patients seeking abortion careā€ and to engage in violations of patient privacy while inflicting undue emotional distress.

Hawkins, the Republican House speaker, said the record numbers of Kansas abortions ā€” the increase has been driven by bans or restrictions imposed in other states ā€” was sufficient to warrant scrutiny of KDHE reporting on abortion. He also said the governor had no business suppressing reporting on abortion and criticized her for tapping into ā€œirrational fears of offending the for-profit pro-abortion lobby.ā€

******************************************************************************************

Tim Carpenter

Tim Carpenter has reported on Kansas for 35 years. He covered the Capitol for 16 years at the Topeka Capital-Journal and previously worked for the Lawrence Journal-World and United Press International.

The preceding story was previously published by the Kansas Reflector and is republished with permission.

******************************************************************************************

The Kansas Reflector is a nonprofit news operation providing in-depth reporting, diverse opinions and daily coverage of state government and politics. This public service is free to readers and other news outlets. We are part of States Newsroom: the nationā€™s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization, with reporting from every capital.

Continue Reading

Colorado

Five transgender, nonbinary ICE detainees allege mistreatment at Colo. detention center

Advocacy groups filed complaint with federal officials on April 9

Published

on

(Photo courtesy of GEO Group)

Five transgender and nonbinary people who are in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody at a privately-run detention center in Colorado say they continue to suffer mistreatment.

The Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network, the National Immigration Project and the American Immigration Council on April 9 filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security’s Offices for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Immigration Detention Ombudsman and Inspector General and ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility on behalf of the detainees at the Aurora Contract Detention Facility near Denver.

Charlotte, one of the five complainants, says she spends up to 23 hours a day in her room. 

She says in the complaint that a psychiatrist has prescribed her medications for anxiety and depression, but “is in the dark about her actual diagnoses because they were not explained to her.” Myriah and Elsa allege they do not have regular access to hormones and other related health care.

Omar, who identifies as trans and nonbinary, in the complaint alleges they would “start hormone replacement therapy if they could be assured that they would not be placed in solitary confinement.” Other detainees in the complaint allege staff have also threatened to place them in isolation.

“They have been told repeatedly that, if they started therapy, they would be placed in ‘protective custody’ (solitary confinement) because the Aurora facility has no nonbinary or men’s transgender housing unit,” reads the complaint. “This is so, despite other trans men having been detained in Aurora in the past, so Omar is very likely receiving misinformation that is preventing them from accessing the treatment they require.”

Omar further alleges staffers told them upon their arrival that “they had to have a ‘boy part’ (meaning a penis) to be assigned to” the housing unit in which other trans people live. Other complainants say staff have also subjected them to degrading comments and other mistreatment because of their gender identity. 

“Victoria, Charlotte and Myriah are all apprehensive about a specific female guard who is assigned to the housing unit for transgender women at Aurora,” reads the complaint. “Victoria has experienced this guard peering at her through the glass on the door of her form. Charlotte, Myriah and the other women in her dorm experienced the same guard making fun of them after they complained that she had confiscated all of their personal hygiene products, like their toothbrushes and toothpaste, and replaced them with menstrual pads and tampons, which she knows they do not need.”

“She said something to them like, ‘If you were real women, you would need these things,'” reads the complaint. “The same guard told them that they had to ask her for their personal hygiene products when they wanted to use them, stripping them of their most basic agency.”

Victoria, who has been in ICE custody for more than two years, also says she does not have regular access to hormones. Victoria further claims poor food, lack of access to exercise and stress and anxiety because of her prolonged detention has caused has made her health deteriorate.

The GEO Group, a Florida-based company, operates the Aurora Contract Detention Facility.

Advocates for years have complained about the conditions for trans and nonbinary people in ICE custody and have demanded the agency release all of them.

Roxsana HernƔndez, a trans Honduran woman with HIV, on May 25, 2018, died in ICE custody in New Mexico. Her family in 2020 sued the federal government and the five private companies who were responsible for her care.

Johana “Joa” Medina Leon, a trans Salvadoran woman, on June 1, 2019, passed away at a Texas hospital four days after her release from ICE custody. Kelly GonzĆ”lez Aguilar, a trans Honduran woman, had been in ICE custody for more than two years until her release from the Aurora Contract Detention Center on July 14, 2020.

ICE spokesperson Steve Kotecki on Friday told the Blade there were 10 “self-identified transgender detainees” at the Aurora Contract Detention Center on April 11. The facility’s “transgendered units” can accommodate up to 87 trans detainees. 

A 2015 memorandum then-ICE Executive Associate Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations Thomas Homan signed requires personnel to allow trans detainees to identify themselves based on their gender identity on data forms. The directive, among other things, also contains guidelines for a ā€œrespectful, safe and secure environmentā€ for trans detainees and requires detention facilities to provide them with access to hormone therapy and other trans-specific health care.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is committed to ensuring that all those in its custody reside in safe, secure and humane environments,” said Kotecki. “ICE regularly reviews each case involving self-identified transgender noncitizens and determines on a case-by-case basis whether detention is warranted.”

The complaint, however, states this memo does not go far enough to protect trans and nonbinary detainees.

“ICE’s 2015 guidance has some significant flaws,” it reads. “It fails to provide meaningful remedies for policy violations. It does not acknowledge the challenges that nonbinary people face when imprisoned by ICE and the lack of such guidance explains why the needs of nonbinary people are largely misunderstood and unmet.”

“Further, the language used to describe people who are TNB is not inclusive and does not reflect terminology adopted by the community it is meant to describe,” adds the complaint. “Although this list is not exhaustive, it addresses some of the primary concerns voiced by the complaints.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular