Local
Virginia lawmakers to consider 2 LGBT bills
Equality Virginia CEO Jon Blair said the two bills expanding workplace discrimination protections and permitting employee life insurance benefits for domestic partners were the lobby group’s top priorities with the best chance of passing in 2010.
Other bills to be considered by committees, but with a more doubtful future, include extending reproductive technology access to unmarried couples.
After a series of Assembly sessions where attempts were made to further restrict the rights of LGBT Virginians, including the successful constitutional amendment banning same-sex relationship recognition, it appeared to LGBT rights lobbyists that no further attempts were being planned this session.
“The atmosphere is not perfect, however it is imminent,” Blair told DC Agenda. “Equality is going to happen in Virginia and the handful of people who are trying to hold it down will only be successful for so long.”
Blair’s big-ticket item is passing a bill barring workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, enshrining in law former Gov. Tim Kaine’s executive order that incoming Gov. Bob McDonnell declined to continue.
Like the executive order it will replace, if passed, the workplace protection will only cover public employees. Blair hoped, though, that step would be just the start.
“Virginia is the only state in the nation where it is 100 percent legal to fire someone based on their perceived sexual orientation. Protected classes are race, gender, creed — those kinds of things,” he said.
“This [bill] means every gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Virginian should be protected in the workplace from being fired based on their sexual orientation. This is public employers this year.”
The lobby group’s second priority this year is a group life insurance bill that would allow insurers and employers to mutually agree upon any group of people they’re willing to insure.
“Virginia is quirky in having the Dillon Rule,” Blair said. “Right now insurers want to provide life insurance to Virginians and employers want to provide life insurance to Virginians, but they do not have express permission from the state. Until they have permission from the state, they are not able to do that because the Dillon Rule prevents that.”
Virginia is the last state to have kept the court-authored law dating back to the 1860s, which limited the powers of municipal corporations to only those granted by state legislatures or where the state has not defined its own powers in that area. Local government entities are just some of the employers that have sought to provide life insurance to domestic partners, but were thwarted by state law.
“Employees want it, employers want it, and insurers want it, and all we need is the General Assembly to bless it,” Blair said. “We’re not just talking about GLBT people here. Any person who has an otherwise qualified adult in their household who they want to provide insurance to, including straight couples.
“I’m the perfect example. I’m straight and engaged. Until my fiancé and I are married, I can’t provide life insurance to her. If you don’t think that impacts where she chooses to work, you’re crazy.”
Like the federal Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligations Act, supporters say lack of action in the matter hurts the government and the state.
“This isn’t just about recruiting new employees, either,” Blair said. “There are companies here that have more than one major headquarters and they cannot promote employees from one of those offices to their main headquarters here because employees will refuse the promotion based on losing their benefits. Because when they live in Montreal or Seattle or wherever they are allowed to provide benefits to those partners and when they move here they lose them.”
The task of lobbying to get both bills passed falls primarily to Virginia Equality’s chief counsel, Claire Guthrie Gastañaga, a 24-year veteran in the assembly.
“Given that the business community has made it clear the life insurance bill is a common sense piece of legislation and voters made it clear that non-discrimination is an issue they’re in agreement should be a policy of the Commonwealth, we shouldn’t have any problems getting these bills through,” she said.
If that sounds too optimistic, Guthrie Gastañaga said she wishes it didn’t.
“I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve seen bills people have agreed to co-patron a bill they’ve ended up voting against, and they’re just as likely to come to you and say I’ll vote for it on the floor, but I’m not in a position to co-patron it.
“I’m not counting any chickens before they hatch, but I’m sitting on a bunch of them and keeping them really warm in this cold weather.”
The life insurance bill is similar to a previous law passed in 2005 that extended the rights of employers to offer health insurance to domestic partners. That law passed by just one vote in the state House, which Guthrie Gastañaga says validated the lobby group’s approach to working with both parties.
Virginia Equality came under fire for that bipartisan approach to lobbying when it continued to endorse Del. Tom Rust, a Republican, over a Democratic candidate with strong support from the LGBT community.
But the relationship building has apparently paid off. Rust’s office confirmed to DC Agenda that the lawmaker will introduce the life insurance bill again this session.
Blair said the arguments already appealed to Republican principles.
“When you explain the life insurance bill is revenue neutral and won’t cost employers anything, that means something,” he said. “When you can say a comprehensive non-discrimination policy is good for business and employers recruiting employees — and 88 percent of fortune 500 companies in Virginia already voluntarily have a non-discrimination policy because they on their own decided it was a good idea — that means something.”
The state’s only openly gay delegate, Adam Ebbin, a Democrat, noted that he felt there would be “more than one Republican” joining him in supporting both bills.
“The insurance industry and business community very much support this. If people see the advantage of this bill for a wide variety of potential policy beneficiaries, I think it can pass.”
District of Columbia
‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge
A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10.
Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets.
Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers standing in front of the shop.
Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.
“I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.
“And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”
The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.
Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured.
Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.
“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”
The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.
Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom.
Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.
The dispute over the intricacies of the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.
Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.
DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.
“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.
Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.
Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident.
“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.”
“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.
“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.
Maryland
Democrats hold leads in almost every race of Annapolis municipal election
Jared Littmann ahead in mayor’s race.
By CODY BOTELER | The Democratic candidates in the Annapolis election held early leads in the races for mayor and nearly every city council seat, according to unofficial results released on election night.
Jared Littmann, a former alderman and the owner of K&B Ace Hardware, did not go so far as to declare victory in his race to be the next mayor of Annapolis, but said he’s optimistic that the mail-in ballots to be counted later this week will support his lead.
Littmannn said November and December will “fly by” as he plans to meet with the city department heads and chiefs to “pepper them with questions.”
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Democrats on Tuesday increased their majority in the Virginia House of Delegates.
The Associated Press notes the party now has 61 seats in the chamber. Democrats before Election Day had a 51-48 majority in the House.
All six openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual candidates — state Dels. Rozia Henson (D-Prince William County), Laura Jane Cohen (D-Fairfax County), Joshua Cole (D-Fredericksburg), Marcia Price (D-Newport News), Adele McClure (D-Arlington County), and Mark Sickles (D-Fairfax County) — won re-election.
Lindsey Dougherty, a bisexual Democrat, defeated state Del. Carrie Coyner (R-Chesterfield County) in House District 75 that includes portions of Chesterfield and Prince George Counties. (Attorney General-elect Jay Jones in 2022 texted Coyner about a scenario in which he shot former House Speaker Todd Gilbert, a Republican.)
Other notable election results include Democrat John McAuliff defeating state Del. Geary Higgins (R-Loudoun County) in House District 30. Former state Del. Elizabeth Guzmán beat state Del. Ian Lovejoy (R-Prince William County) in House District 22.
Democrats increased their majority in the House on the same night they won all three statewide offices: governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general.
Narissa Rahaman is the executive director of Equality Virginia Advocates, the advocacy branch of Equality Virginia, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy group, last week noted the election results will determine the future of LGBTQ rights, reproductive freedom, and voting rights in the state.
Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin in 2024 signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.
The General Assembly earlier this year approved a resolution that seeks to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment that defines marriage in the state constitution as between a man and a woman. The resolution must pass in two successive legislatures before it can go to the ballot.
Shreya Jyotishi contributed to this article.
-
District of Columbia2 days ago‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case
-
Sports2 days agoGay speedskater racing toward a more inclusive future in sports
-
Celebrity News4 days agoJonathan Bailey is People’s first openly gay ‘Sexiest Man Alive’
-
Michigan4 days agoFBI thwarts Halloween terror plot targeting Mich. LGBTQ bars
