Connect with us

National

Gay Iowa lawmaker fears undoing of marriage rights

McCoy talks Iowa caucuses, future LGBT intiatives

Published

on

State Sen. Matt McCoy (photo courtesy of McCoy)

HOUSTON — The only openly gay member of the Iowa State Senate believes marriage equality in the state could “absolutely” be in danger, despite a recent win solidifying a Democratic majority in the chamber for the remainder of the year.

State Sen. Matt McCoy, who’s served in the legislature since 1993 — first as a House member and then as a senator — said marriage rights for gay couples could be in jeopardy  in the 2012 election if Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal loses his seat or Democrats lose their majority in the chamber.

“We’ve got to make sure that we win some of those key seats that have allowed us to hold on to a majority,” McCoy told the Blade during an interview in Houston. “So we need to have a very strong Democratic year across the board, so that from the very top of the ticket on down, we’re going to need a strong ticket.”

McCoy made the comments Saturday during the 27th International Gay & Lesbian Leadership Conference sponsored by the Gay & Lesbian Leadership Institute.

Gronstal, whose seat has been targeted by Republicans in the 2012 election, has said he wouldn’t allow a vote on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in Iowa, which has had marriage equality since 2009. The Republican-controlled House has already approved such a measure.

The amendment would need to pass in two consecutive sessions of the legislature before it would be sent to voters, so the soonest it could appear before voters is 2014 — even with Republican control of both the House and Senate next year.

Concern over the future makeup of the Iowa Legislature persists despite a recent Democratic win in a special election assuring that Democrats would continue to maintain control of the legislature through next year.

On the upcoming Iowa caucuses, McCoy said some of the lower-tier candidates, such as Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), are doing well and there’s an anybody-but-Romney attitude in the state. But he added that Obama is in a strong position to defeat any challenger.

“I think Obama can beat any of them,” McCoy said. “I believe that, for obvious reasons, I think that Gingrich makes a better nominee for Democrats to beat, although Romney’s been all over the board on his issues. I think it’ll either be Romney or Gingrich, and, I think, of the two, I think, I’d rather run against Gingrich than Romney.”

A transcript of the interview between McCoy and the Blade follows:

Washington Blade: Sen. McCoy, can you tell me what you think the Democratic win in the special election and sustained Democratic majority in Iowa means for marriage equality?

Matt McCoy: Well, it’s a terrific win for us. Obviously, we know that by picking up this additional seat, we hold our majority, and, in addition to that, we can ensure that marriage equality will not be on the ballot at least through 2014. So we’ve got two consecutive sessions that this would have to pass, and that won’t happen under a Democratic-controlled Senate for the next year.

Blade: But do you think the next makeup of the legislature could threaten marriage equality in Iowa?

McCoy: Absolutely. I think we’ve got a terrific battle with our leader, Majority Leader Mike Gronstal. We’re very concerned that he win re-election as a Democrat. He’s personally worked with us to hold up control of that issue. In addition to that, we’ve got to make sure that we win some of those key seats that have allowed us to hold on to a majority. So we need to have a very strong Democratic year across the board, so that from the very top of the ticket on down, we’re going to need a strong ticket.

Blade: Do you think we’ll hear more about marriage from the Republican presidential candidates as we get closer to the caucuses?

McCoy: I think so. I think that they’ve done an artful job trying to dodge it a little bit. Their own polling is indicating that this issue is being more accepted widely among the public, and as long as that continues to occur, that is going to be a major problem for the Republican presidential candidates because as they take those extreme positions on those issues, people are becoming more and more disenfranchised with them, especially independent voters.

Blade: What’s your prediction for what will happen will those caucuses? As a Democrat, do you have a particular favorite?

McCoy: As an Iowan, I’ve had an opportunity to see them all come through, and the circus is definitely in town, let me tell you.

I think that right now, I have to take my hat off to some of the non-traditional candidates running the caucuses. I think Ron Paul is doing very well in Iowa, much better than is indicated in the polls. I think that [Rick] Santorum has a base of support among evangelicals, and I think [Michele] Bachmann has a base of support.

I think there is a very strong anti-Romney, or anybody but [Mitt] Romney attitude and [Newt] Gingrich has a pretty strong hold among some of the more traditional Republicans that are less evangelical-based.

So, I would say overall, it’s a tossup, it’s an early test in January. We’re probably less than, what, four weeks away from actually knowing where Iowa is going to come down on that issue, but at this time, I would say Romney is still not faring well in Iowa, and that’s a problem for him.

Blade: Who do you want to see as the Republican nominee, as a Democrat?

McCoy: I think Obama can beat any of them. I believe that, for obvious reasons, I think that Gingrich makes a better nominee for Democrats to beat, although Romney’s been all over the board on his issues. I think it’ll either be Romney or Gingrich, and, I think, of the two, I think, I’d rather run against Gingrich than Romney.

Blade: Now that Iowa has marriage equality, what do you want to see next in terms of LGBT rights for your state?

McCoy: There’s a couple of issues that I’m working on right now. One of them is related to adoptions and for gay parents having the opportunity to just simply list their name as Parent 1 and Parent 2 on the birth certificate as opposed to mother and father. So that is one of my initiatives right now.

That’s an issue pending before our state Supreme Court. I have no doubt that our court’s is going to make the right decision on that, but I’m going to try to help them out this session by bringing that issue out in the public.

The second issue that I’m working on is a decriminalization issue on HIV exposure. We have stigmatized HIV as a disease that’s a communicable disease, and put a criminalization with it that has, unfortunately, had the consequences of more than 36 people having charges filed against them in the state of Iowa of what could become a Class B felony if they’re convicted with $21 million a year in actual costs associated with that.

So, one of the things I want to see us do is treat HIV exposure, HIV transmission as we would treat any other communicable disease, and not stigmatize it among LGBT folks, saying, “Oh, it’s their disease.” It’s all of our disease, and we need to treat it with prevention, education and outreach, and that’s one of the initiatives I know that World AIDS Day — that they’re trying to reach out to people and really help bring the prevention and education and outreach back into our channels. And so, that’s something we could do a better job on as a community, so as a state leader, that’s one of my top initiatives in terms of our issues, LGBT issues in the state of Iowa.

Blade: And what about your plans for yourself? Do you have plans to run for office outside of the legislature at this time?

McCoy: I just received an opportunity to chair the Commerce Committee. I’m also chairing the Infrastructure Appropriations Committee, and I’m vice chair of the Appropriations Committee in the Senate, which means I got a lot of opportunity to do a lot of work and make a lot of decisions, and right now, that’s a great place to be. I can’t imagine anything else in my life right now, but, in the future, obviously, I want to keep the doors open. I’m a fairly young person, and I see the future is bright for LGBT leaders in the future, and so I hope that there will be a place for me to serve, and I hope there will be a place for other LGBT, out, elected officials to play a role in their state and national government in the future.

Blade: Thanks so much, Senator.

Watch the video of the interview here:

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