Connect with us

National

Supporters camp out for 3 days awaiting marriage cases

Undaunted by snow forecast, some determined to see Supreme Court in action

Published

on

Supreme Court, gay marriage, same sex marriage, marriage equality, Proposition 8, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, gay news, Washington Blade
Supreme Court, gay marriage, same sex marriage, marriage equality, Proposition 8, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, gay news, Washington Blade

A line formed at the Supreme Court on Saturday in anticipation of oral arguments in the marriage cases. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Three days before justices will hear oral arguments on California’s Proposition 8, supporters of marriage equality were already lined up before the U.S. Supreme Court on Saturday to ensure they’ll have a seat for the historic event.

Jeffrey DeSoto, a gay 33-year-old computer programmer from New York, stood cross-legged in line next to his sign reading: “I AM A 2ND CLASS CITIZEN: NOH8.” Near him was his sleeping bag, air mattress, blanket and solar cell to charge his cell phone.

“New York State does have marriage equality, but I would want marriage equality across the entire country,” DeSoto said. “That’s an outside outcome to this, but it is there, so I definitely would want to have been at the case where that happens.”

Jordan Haedtler, a straight 24-year-old resident of Oakland, Calif., said he’s closely watched the Prop 8 case, Hollingsworth v. Perry, from its beginnings and attended oral arguments in the case when they were before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“I’m kind of a public policy and politics junkie,” Haedtler said. “I’ve been to several oral arguments in other cases as well, but this case holds a lot of importance for me because I really think that gay rights and marriage equality are one of the main civil rights issues of our time.”

As of Saturday afternoon, about 15 people were camped out outside the building awaiting entry to Tuesday’s hearing. Wearing coats and hats to keep warm in a lingering winter cold, those in line occupied themselves with journal writing, conversation and newspaper reading to pass the time.

For DeSoto, simply coming early on Tuesday morning wasn’t enough. He arrived Friday afternoon to wait in line before the Supreme Court with days remaining before the arguments for an assurance he would have access to the courtroom.

“Actually, I did a little research,” DeSoto said. “I found the names of people who waited in line for the Affordable Care Act, and then I found them on Facebook and messaged a couple of them. One girl messaged me back, and I asked her how far in advance she had come. I think she said four days, so I pretty much tried to match that.”

DeSoto said those waiting in line have a “good amount of camaraderie.” As if living in a commune on the sidewalk of First Street, he said they’re offering food to each other and keeping an eye on each other’s possessions as they wait.

Among them are a gay couple seeking a ruling in favor of their marriage rights; college students with an affinity for legal cases and equality issues; a group of older black men at the front of the line played a game of dominoes to pass the time.

Tyrone Henderson, Supreme Court, gay marriage, same sex marriage, marriage equality, Proposition 8, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, gay news, Washington Blade

D.C. resident Tyrone Henderson supports marriage equality. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Tyrone Henderson, a 48-year-old D.C. resident, talked about his personal support for marriage equality as he glanced over the Metro section of the Washington Post.

“I think people should have the choice of what they want to do,” Henderson said. “You should be able to be with who you want to be with instead of trying to predict who you should be with. I figure you should have the choice whether you want to marry a man or a woman.”

Each of the people in line was a supporter of marriage equality. No opponents of marriage rights for gay couples were waiting outside and braving the chilly weather to attend the arguments. There was one protester who was wearing a sandwich sign, but he was speaking out against the Obama administration’s extrajudicial killing of suspected terrorists overseas by drone attack.

DeSoto said he was heckled by a passer-by who deemed marriage rights for gay couples an unimportant issue.

“I did have one person come by — a heckler, a dissident, whatever,” DeSoto said. “He didn’t like my sign. He pretty much said marriage equality was not a serious issue and that we’re all throwing a hissy fit.”

Those in line were also undaunted by weather reports indicating that they would be snowed upon as they awaited a place in the courtroom. Differing forecasts ranged from cold rain to a few inches of snow on Sunday and Monday.

Dariann Powers, Supreme Court, gay marriage, same sex marriage, marriage equality, Proposition 8, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, gay news, Washington Blade

Darienn Powers came from New York to watch the Prop 8 oral arguments. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Darienn Powers, a 19-year-old straight student from the State University of New York at New Paltz, said she came early in the morning on Saturday prepared in the event of inclement weather.

“I’ve heard that it might be snowing,” Powers said. “I’m wearing my rubberized rain boots, so my feet will be dry, and I have an umbrella. Otherwise, I’m just taking it as it comes.”

A common theme among those waiting in line was a plan to stay for oral arguments for Prop 8 on Tuesday, but leave without attending the arguments on Wednesday for the Defense of Marriage Act. The reasoning — aside from the need to return to work — was the belief the Prop 8 proceedings were more historic than the DOMA case.

Still, that didn’t take away from the historic nature of what they’d be able to see on the first day of oral arguments on marriage equality.

Dexter Smith, a gay junior political science major at Georgia State University, said he expects an intense experience on that day for those on both sides of the marriage equality movement.

“I think it’s going to be packed,” Smith said. “You’re going to have protesters out here. People saying crazy things; you already having people saying crazy things. It’s going to be crazy, and I just want to be here to be in the thick of things.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Lambda Legal praises Biden-Harris administration’s finalized Title IX regulations

New rules to take effect Aug. 1

Published

on

U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona (Screen capture: AP/YouTube)

The Biden-Harris administration’s revised Title IX policy “protects LGBTQ+ students from discrimination and other abuse,” Lambda Legal said in a statement praising the U.S. Department of Education’s issuance of the final rule on Friday.

Slated to take effect on Aug. 1, the new regulations constitute an expansion of the 1972 Title IX civil rights law, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in education programs that receive federal funding.

Pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the landmark 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County case, the department’s revised policy clarifies that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity constitutes sex-based discrimination as defined under the law.

“These regulations make it crystal clear that everyone can access schools that are safe, welcoming and that respect their rights,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said during a call with reporters on Thursday.

While the new rule does not provide guidance on whether schools must allow transgender students to play on sports teams corresponding with their gender identity to comply with Title IX, the question is addressed in a separate rule proposed by the agency in April.

The administration’s new policy also reverses some Trump-era Title IX rules governing how schools must respond to reports of sexual harassment and sexual assault, which were widely seen as imbalanced in favor of the accused.

Jennifer Klein, the director of the White House Gender Policy Council, said during Thursday’s call that the department sought to strike a balance with respect to these issues, “reaffirming our longstanding commitment to fundamental fairness.”

“We applaud the Biden administration’s action to rescind the legally unsound, cruel, and dangerous sexual harassment and assault rule of the previous administration,” Lambda Legal Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project Director Sasha Buchert said in the group’s statement on Friday.

“Today’s rule instead appropriately underscores that Title IX’s civil rights protections clearly cover LGBTQ+ students, as well as survivors and pregnant and parenting students across race and gender identity,” she said. “Schools must be places where students can learn and thrive free of harassment, discrimination, and other abuse.”

Continue Reading

Michigan

Mich. Democrats spar over LGBTQ-inclusive hate crimes law

Lawmakers disagree on just what kind of statute to pass

Published

on

Members of the Michigan House Democrats gather to celebrate Pride month in 2023 in the Capitol building. (Photo courtesy of Michigan House Democrats)

Michigan could soon become the latest state to pass an LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime law, but the state’s Democratic lawmakers disagree on just what kind of law they should pass.

Currently, Michigan’s Ethnic Intimidation Act only offers limited protections to victims of crime motivated by their “race, color, religion, gender, or national origin.” Bills proposed by Democratic lawmakers expand the list to include “actual or perceived race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, ethnicity, physical or mental disability, age, national origin, or association or affiliation with any such individuals.” 

Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel have both advocated for a hate crime law, but house and senate Democrats have each passed different hate crimes packages, and Nessel has blasted both as being too weak.

Under the house proposal that passed last year (House Bill 4474), a first offense would be punishable with a $2,000 fine, up to two years in prison, or both. Penalties double for a second offense, and if a gun or other dangerous weapons is involved, the maximum penalty is six years in prison and a fine of $7,500. 

But that proposal stalled when it reached the senate, after far-right news outlets and Fox News reported misinformation that the bill only protected LGBTQ people and would make misgendering a trans person a crime. State Rep. Noah Arbit, the bill’s sponsor, was also made the subject of a recall effort, which ultimately failed.

Arbit submitted a new version of the bill (House Bill 5288) that added sections clarifying that misgendering a person, “intentionally or unintentionally” is not a hate crime, although the latest version (House Bill 5400) of the bill omits this language.

That bill has since stalled in a house committee, in part because the Democrats lost their house majority last November, when two Democratic representatives resigned after being elected mayors. The Democrats regained their house majority last night by winning two special elections.

Meanwhile, the senate passed a different package of hate crime bills sponsored by state Sen. Sylvia Santana (Senate Bill 600) in March that includes much lighter sentences, as well as a clause ensuring that misgendering a person is not a hate crime. 

Under the senate bill, if the first offense is only a threat, it would be a misdemeanor punishable by one year in prison and up to $1,000 fine. A subsequent offense or first violent hate crime, including stalking, would be a felony that attracts double the punishment.

Multiple calls and emails from the Washington Blade to both Arbit and Santana requesting comment on the bills for this story went unanswered.

The attorney general’s office sent a statement to the Blade supporting stronger hate crime legislation.

“As a career prosecutor, [Nessel] has seen firsthand how the state’s weak Ethnic Intimidation Act (not updated since the late 1980’s) does not allow for meaningful law enforcement and court intervention before threats become violent and deadly, nor does it consider significant bases for bias.  It is our hope that the legislature will pass robust, much-needed updates to this statute,” the statement says.

But Nessel, who has herself been the victim of racially motivated threats, has also blasted all of the bills presented by Democrats as not going far enough.

“Two years is nothing … Why not just give them a parking ticket?” Nessel told Bridge Michigan.

Nessel blames a bizarre alliance far-right and far-left forces that have doomed tougher laws.

“You have this confluence of forces on the far right … this insistence that the First Amendment protects this language, or that the Second Amendment protects the ability to possess firearms under almost any and all circumstances,” Nessel said. “But then you also have the far left that argues basically no one should go to jail or prison for any offense ever.”

The legislature did manage to pass an “institutional desecration” law last year that penalizes hate-motivated vandalism to churches, schools, museums, and community centers, and is LGBTQ-inclusive.

According to data from the U.S. Department of Justice, reported hate crime incidents have been skyrocketing, with attacks motivated by sexual orientation surging by 70 percent from 2020 to 2022, the last year for which data is available. 

Twenty-two states, D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have passed LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime laws. Another 11 states have hate crime laws that include protections for “sexual orientation” but not “gender identity.”

Michigan Democrats have advanced several key LGBTQ rights priorities since they took unified control of the legislature in 2023. A long-stalled comprehensive anti-discrimination law was passed last year, as did a conversion therapy ban. Last month the legislature updated family law to make surrogacy easier for all couples, including same-sex couples. 

A bill to ban the “gay panic” defense has passed the state house and was due for a Senate committee hearing on Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Indiana

Drag queen announces run for mayor of Ind. city

Branden Blaettne seeking Fort Wayne’s top office

Published

on

Branden Blaettner being interviewed by a local television station during last year’s Pride month. (WANE screenshot)

In a Facebook post Tuesday, a local drag personality announced he was running for the office of mayor once held by the late Fort Wayne Mayor Tom Henry, who died last month just a few months into his fifth term.

Henry was recently diagnosed with late-stage stomach cancer and experienced an emergency that landed him in hospice care. He died shortly after.

WPTA, a local television station, reported that Fort Wayne resident Branden Blaettne, whose drag name is Della Licious, confirmed he filed paperwork to be one of the candidates seeking to finish out the fifth term of the late mayor.

Blaettner, who is a community organizer, told WPTA he doesn’t want to “get Fort Wayne back on track,” but rather keep the momentum started by Henry going while giving a platform to the disenfranchised groups in the community. Blaettner said he doesn’t think his local fame as a drag queen will hold him back.

“It’s easy to have a platform when you wear platform heels,” Blaettner told WPTA. “The status quo has left a lot of people out in the cold — both figuratively and literally,” Blaettner added.

The Indiana Capital Chronicle reported that state Rep. Phil GiaQuinta, who has led the Indiana House Democratic caucus since 2018, has added his name to a growing list of Fort Wayne politicos who want to be the city’s next mayor. A caucus of precinct committee persons will choose the new mayor.

According to the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, the deadline for residents to file candidacy was 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday. A town hall with the candidates is scheduled for 6 p.m. on Thursday at Franklin School Park. The caucus is set for 10:30 a.m. on April 20 at the Lincoln Financial Event Center at Parkview Field.

At least six candidates so far have announced they will run in the caucus. They include Branden Blaettne, GiaQuinta, City Councilwoman Michelle Chambers, City Councilwoman Sharon Tucker, former city- and county-council candidate Palermo Galindo, and 2023 Democratic primary mayoral candidate Jorge Fernandez.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular