Connect with us

Local

LGBT witnesses back D.C. anti-bullying bills

ACLU says legislation could violate students’ civil liberties

Published

on

D.C. Mayor-elect Vincent Gray presided over a hearing this week on two bills to address bullying and harassment in public schools. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Nine witnesses representing the LGBT community expressed strong support for two bills aimed at prohibiting bullying in D.C. schools, public libraries and parks during a City Council hearing this week.

The LGBT witnesses, including two gay and one transgender student, gave examples of anti-LGBT bullying and harassment in the D.C. public school system. They joined other witnesses in noting that existing public school policies pertaining to bullying were not strong enough to adequately address the problem.

“The District of Columbia has been a pioneer on issues such as nondiscrimination in schools and yet is one of only a handful of jurisdictions in this country without an anti-bullying law,” said Alison Gill, a public policy associate with the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN).

Gill and other witnesses pointed to the 2009 D.C. Youth Risk Behavior Survey, a federally funded study that includes data on lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Among other things, the study found that 29 percent of LGB teens in the city’s middle schools and high schools have attempted suicide. The study did not collect data on transgender students.

Anti-gay bullying and harassment are believed to have played a large role in prompting the youth to consider suicide, Gill and other witnesses said.

D.C. Mayor-elect Vincent Gray presided over the hearing in his current role as City Council Chair and chair of the Council’s Committee of the Whole. He takes office as mayor on Jan. 2.

The Committee of the Whole and the Committee on Libraries, Parks and Recreation, which is chaired by Council member Harry Thomas (D-Ward 5), conducted a joint hearing on the two bills, the Bullying Prevention Act of 2010 and the Harassment and Intimidation Prevention Act of 2010.

Gray said after the hearing that the two bills would be combined following a markup hearing that he predicted would take place sometime next year.

“I don’t see the evidence of a comprehensive policy existing in the city on this,” Gray told reporters after the hearing, saying a combined version of the two bills would go a long way to address the problem of bullying.

The Bullying Prevention Act, which Gray and Council member Michael Brown (I-At-Large) introduced in April, calls for developing a “model policy prohibiting bullying, harassment and intimidation in the District of Columbia public schools.” It requires all public schools to adopt an anti-bullying and harassment policy at least as strong as the model policy defined in the bill.

The Harassment and Intimidation Prevention Act, which was introduced in October by Thomas, calls for developing similar policies banning bullying and harassment but expands the coverage to D.C. public charter schools, the city’s public libraries and parks and recreation centers, and to the University of the District of Columbia.

Thomas’s bill also covers bullying and harassment conducted through “electronic communication,” such as e-mail or social networking sites.

The bill defines harassment, intimidation or bullying as “any gesture or written, verbal or physical act, including electronic communication, that is reasonably perceived as being motivated either by any actual or perceived characteristic, such as race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, or a mental, physical or sensory handicap, or by any other distinguishing characteristic…”

It says an act of bullying, intimidation or harassment would be one that “a reasonable person should know, under the circumstances, will have the effect of harming a student or damaging the student’s property, or placing a student in reasonable fear of harm to his person or damage to his property.”

The definition further states that the act in question “has the effect of insulting or demeaning any student or group of students in such as way as to cause substantial disruption in, or substantial interference with, the orderly operation of a school, university, recreation facility, or library.”

Arthur Spitzer, legal director of the D.C. chapter of the ACLU, said the ACLU supports the concept of anti-bullying legislation but has concerns that the wording of the two proposed bills in D.C. could violate students’ civil liberties.

“What does it mean by harming a student?” he said of part of the definition in one of the bills. “Does that mean hurting a student’s feelings? If a student comes in and says I feel very harmed by the fact that so and so said I was a crappy athlete … That’s not bullying,” he said.

“So I think the language here needs to be tightened up.”

Spitzer told the Washington Post that it would be “perfectly legitimate” for a student to say he or she thinks homosexual conduct is “against the word of God.” Although such a comment might hurt the feelings of a gay student, that should not be defined as bullying but instead as “an opinion that every student has a right to express,” he told the Post.

GLSEN spokesperson Daryl Presgraves said GLSEN believes the language in the two D.C. bills would not violate students’ civil liberties. But he said GLSEN and others supporting the bills would be open to making changes if the ACLU demonstrates that the language would prevent students from expressing their opinions in a way that doesn’t cross the line of true bullying and harassment.

Trina Cole, a male to female transgender student who graduated in 2009 from D.C.’s Dunbar Senior High School, told the hearing she was victimized by harassment and intimidation that went far beyond hurting her feelings.

“At school, I was often both verbally and physically abused,” she said. “We need to have more support in our schools so that the bullying that I went through does not continue to happen every day.”

Cole testified on behalf of Metro Teen AIDS, a D.C.-based group that provides services to LGBT youth at risk for HIV.

Ginnie Cooper, chief librarian for the city’s public library system; Jesus Auguirre, director of the Department of Parks and Recreation; and Mark Farley, vice president of the Office of Human Resources for the University of the District of Columbia each expressed strong support for the two bills.

A spokesperson for the D.C. public schools did not appear before the hearing. Gray said the person expected to testify had a scheduling conflict and was expected to submit written testimony within the next week.

Gay activist and ANC commissioner-elect Bob Summersgill noted that the D.C. Public Schools currently use city-adopted regulations pertaining to student discipline as a basis for addressing bullying and harassment of students. A provision of the city’s Human Rights Act and a March 2000 directive by the then D.C. schools superintendent are also used as a patchwork of rules or laws to address bullying.

“The limitations in all of these laws and regulations are the implementation and enforcement,” Summersgill told the hearing. “If a school fails to make clear that bullying will not be tolerated, or if a teacher or staff fails to intervene when bullying occurs, or if a teacher or staff makes a derogatory comment or through inaction shows their distaste for some group, then they are tacitly giving approval of bullying and harassment,” he said.

Michael Musante, an official with Friends of Choice in Urban Schools (FOCUS), which advocates for D.C.’s public charter schools, said the group did not support the proposed legislation, saying charter schools were formed as semi-autonomous institutions independent from city control.

He said many charter schools already have anti-bullying polices and said charter schools prefer to address bullying through school disciplinary codes rather than “one-size-fits-all legislation.”

Gray and Council member Michael Brown, speaking after the hearing, said they favor including charter schools in the legislation before the Council.

“They have over 30,000 of our kids being educated with public money,” Gray said of the charter schools.

Others who testified in favor of the bills at the hearing included Renee Reopell, program associate for the D.C. LGBT community center; Peter Rosenstein, LGBT community activist; Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance; Bill Briggs, executive director of Metro D.C. Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG); and Andrew Barnett, executive director of Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League (SMYAL).

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Virginia

Va. Senate committee approves resolution to repeal marriage amendment

Outgoing state Sen. Adam Ebbin introduced SJ3

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

The Virginia Senate Privileges and Elections Committee on Wednesday by a 10-4 vote margin approved a resolution that seeks to repeal a state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Outgoing state Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) introduced SJ3.

Same-sex couples have been able to legally marry in Virginia since 2014. Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin in 2024 signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.

A resolution that seeks to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment passed in the General Assembly in 2021. The resolution passed again in 2025.

Two successive legislatures must approve the resolution before it can go to the ballot. Democrats in the Virginia House of Delegates have said the resolution’s passage is among their 2026 legislative priorities.

Continue Reading

Virginia

Mark Levine loses race to succeed Adam Ebbin in ‘firehouse’ Democratic primary

State Del. Elizabeth Bennett-Parker won with 70.6 percent of vote

Published

on

Former Va. state Del. Mark Levine (D-Alexandria)

Gay former Virginia House of Delegates member Mark Levine (D-Alexandria) lost his race to become the Democratic nominee to replace gay state Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) in a Jan. 13 “firehouse” Democratic primary.

Levine finished in second place in the hastily called primary, receiving 807 votes or 17.4 percent. The winner in the four-candidate race, state Del. Elizabeth Bennett-Parker, who was endorsed by both Ebbin and Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger received 3,281 votes or 70.6 percent.

Ebbin, whose 39th Senate District includes Alexandria and parts of Arlington and Fairfax Counties, announced on Jan. 7 that he was resigning effective Feb. 18, to take a job in the Spanberger administration as senior advisor at the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority.

Results of the Jan. 13 primary, which was called by Democratic Party leaders in Alexandria, Arlington, and Fairfax, show that candidates Charles Sumpter, a World Wildlife Fund director, finished in third place with 321 voters or 6.9 percent; and Amy Jackson, the former Alexandria vice mayor, finished in fourth place with 238 votes or 5.1 percent.

Bennett-Parker, who LGBTQ community advocates consider a committed LGBTQ ally, will now compete as the Democratic nominee in a Feb. 10 special election in which registered voters in the 39th District of all political parties and independents will select Ebbin’s replacement in the state senate.

The Alexandria publication ALX Now reports that local realtor Julie Robben Linebery has been selected by the Alexandria Republican City Committee to be the GOP candidate to compete in the Jan. 10 special election. According to ALX Now, Lineberry was the only application to run in a now cancelled special party caucus type event initially called to select the GOP nominees.

It couldn’t immediately be determined if an independent or other party candidate planned to run in the special election.  

Bennett-Parker is considered the strong favorite to win the Feb. 10 special election in the heavily Democratic 39th District, where Democrat Ebbin has served as senator since 2012. 

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Ruby Corado sentenced to 33 months in prison

Former Casa Ruby director pleaded guilty to wire fraud in 2024

Published

on

Ruby Corado (Washington Blade photo by Ernesto Valle)

A federal judge on Jan. 13 sentenced Ruby Corado, the founder and former executive director of the now closed D.C. LGBTQ community services organization Casa Ruby, to 33 months of incarceration for a charge of wire fraud to which she pleaded guilty in July 2024.

U.S. District Court Judge Trevor M. McFadden handed down the sentence that had been requested by prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia after Corado’s sentencing had been postponed six times for various reasons.

The judge also sentenced her to 24 months of supervised release upon her completion of incarceration.  

In addition to the sentence of incarceration, McFadden agreed to a request by prosecutors to hold Corado responsible for “restitution” and “forfeiture” in the amount of $956,215 that prosecutors have said she illegally misappropriated from federal loans obtained by Casa Ruby.

The charge to which she pleaded guilty is based on allegations that she diverted at least $180,000 “in taxpayer backed emergency COVID relief funds to private offshore bank accounts,” according to court documents.  

Court records show FBI agents arrested Corado on March 5, 2024, at a hotel in Laurel, Md., shortly after she returned to the U.S. from El Salvador, where authorities say she moved in 2022. Prosecutors have said in charging documents that she allegedly fled to El Salvador, where she was born, after “financial irregularities at Casa Ruby became public,” and the LGBTQ organization ceased operating.

Shortly after her arrest, another judge agreed to release Corado into the custody of her niece in Rockville, Md., under a home detention order. But at an Oct. 14, 2025, court hearing at which the sentencing was postponed after Corado’s court appointed attorney withdrew from the case, McFadden ordered Corado to be held in jail until the time of her once again rescheduled sentencing.   

Her attorney at the time, Elizabeth Mullin, stated in a court motion that her reason for withdrawing from the case was an “irreconcilable breakdown in the attorney-client relationship.”

Corado’s newly retained attorney, Pleasant Brodnax, filed a 25-page defense Memorandum in Aid of Sentencing on Jan. 6, calling for the judge to sentence Corado only to the time she had already served in detention since October.  

Among other things, Brodnax’s defense memorandum disputes the claim by prosecutors that Corado improperly diverted as much as $956,215 from federally backed loans to Casa Ruby, saying the total amount Corado diverted was $200,000. Her memo also states that Corado diverted the funds to a bank account in El Salvador for the purpose of opening a Casa Ruby facility there, not to be used for her personally.

“Ms. Corado has accepted responsibility for transferring a portion of the loan disbursements into another account she operated and ultimately transferring a portion of the loan disbursements to an account in El Salvador,” the memo continues.

“Her purpose in transferring funds to El Salvador was to fund Casa Ruby programs in El Salvador,” it says, adding, “Of course, she acknowledges that the terms of the loan agreement did not permit her to transfer the funds to El Salvador for any purpose.”

In his own 16-page sentencing recommendation memo, Assistant U.S. Attorney John Borchert, the lead prosecutor in the case, said Corado’s action amounted at the least to fraud.

“The defendant and Casa Ruby received no less than $1.2 million in taxpayer backed funds during the COVID-19 global health crisis,” he memo states. “But rather than use those funds to support Casa Ruby’s mission as the defendant promised, the defendant further contributed to its demise by unlawfully transferring no less than $180,000 of these federal emergency relief funds into her own private offshore bank accounts,” it says.

“Then, when media reports suggested the defendant would be prosecuted for squandering Casa Ruby’s government funding, she sold her home and fled the country,” the memo states. “Meanwhile, the people who she had promised to pay with taxpayer-backed funds – her employees, landlord, and vendors – were left behind flat broke.”

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office and Corado’s attorney didn’t immediately respond to a request from the Washington Blade for comment on the judge’s sentence. 

“Ms. Corado accepts full responsibility for her actions in this case,” defense attorney Brodnax says in her sentencing memo. “She acknowledges the false statements made in the loan applications and that she used some of the money outside the United States,” it says.

“However, the money was still utilized for the same purpose and intention as the funds used in the United States, to assist the LGBTQ community,” it states. “Ms. Corado did not use the money to buy lavish goods or fund a lavish lifestyle.”  

Brodnax also states in her memo that as a transgender woman, Corado could face abuse and danger in a correctional facility where she may be sent if sentenced to incarceration.   

“Ruby Corado committed a crime, she is now paying the price,” said D.C. LGBTQ rights advocate Peter Rosenstein. “While it is sad in many ways, we must remember she hurt the transgender community with what she did, and in many ways they all paid for her crime.”

Continue Reading

Popular