National
Court won’t invalidate Prop 8 ruling over judge’s sexual orientation
Walker told media he’s gay following decision overturning marriage ban
A California federal court on Tuesday denied a request to invalidate a decision overturning the state’s ban on same-sex marriage based on the argument that the judge who decided the matter should have recused himself because he’s gay.
U.S. District Judge James Ware determined in his decision that retired U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker’s sexual orientation isn’t a justification for recusal or disqualification in the case that will determine the constitutionality of Proposition 8, which California voters approved in 2008 to make a ban on same-sex marriage part of the state constitution.
“The sole fact that a federal judge shares the same circumstances or personal characteristics with other members of the general public, and that the judge could be affected by the outcome of a proceeding in the same way that other members of the general public would be affected, is not a basis for either recusal or disqualification under Section 455(b)(4),” Ware writes.
Last year, Walker in a 135-page decision, determined that Prop 8 was unconstitutional because it violated equal protection rights in the U.S. Constitution. Months after he made the decision, Walker disclosed to the media earlier this year that he’s gay and has been in a same-sex relationship with a physician for 10 years.
Proponents of Prop 8 pounced on the reports and said Walker was unable to issue an impartial decision in a case deciding whether same-sex couples can marry because of his sexual orientation and his relationship.
But Ware denied in his decision that these personal characteristic were reason to invalidate Walker’s ruling and maintained that proponents of Prop 8 haven’t presented evidence that he would be impartial in his decision.
“A well-informed, thoughtful observer would recognize that the mere fact that a judge is in a relationship with another person — whether of the same or the opposite sex — does not ipso facto imply that the judge must be so interested in marrying that person that he would be unable to exhibit the impartiality which, it is presumed, all federal judges maintain,” Ware wrote.
Ware also disputed the argument that Walker should have disclosed his sexual orientation before he decided the case and maintained Walker “had a duty to preserve the integrity of the judiciary” and was justified in keeping his relationship to himself.
“Among other things, this means that if, in an overabundance of caution, he were to have disclosed intimate, but irrelevant, details about his personal life that were not reasonably related to the question of disqualification, he could have set a pernicious precedent,” Ware writes. “Such a precedent would be detrimental to the integrity of the judiciary, because it would promote, incorrectly, disclosure by judges of highly personal information (e.g., information about a judge’s history of being sexually abused as a child), however irrelevant or time-consuming.”
Chad Griffin, board president of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the organization behind the lawsuit challenging Prop 8, praised Ware’s decision as a “historic victory” for justice and same-sex marriage.
“Chief Judge Ware’s ruling makes it very clear that bigotry and hatred have no place in our judicial system and that the anti-marriage forces’ extreme and unsupported antics have no place in a court of law and indeed, in our society,” Griffin said. “The freedom to marry is a constitutional right for all Americans and AFER will not rest until we have full marriage equality for all our citizens.”
Although Ware has issued a decision in the matter, proponents of Prop 8 say they’re not done with the issue. In a statement, Charles Cooper of Cooper & Kirk, lead counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, said his legal team disagrees with Ware’s ruling and will appeal the decision to a higher court.
“Our legal team will appeal this decision and continue our tireless efforts to defend the will of the people of California to preserve marriage as the union of a man and a woman,” Cooper said.
In a separate decision issued on Tuesday, Ware settled the issue of whether video recordings of the trial in Walker’s possession should be returned to the court. Walker had used a three-minute videotape of the trial during a lecture, invoking the ire of those who worked to enact Prop 8 and said they didn’t want testimony during the trial viewed publicly.
But Ware says there is no indication that parties have violated the protective order by using their tapes in their possession and may hang on to them as the appeal in the case proceeds. Additionally, although Walker apparently gave the tapes back to the court, Ware plans to return them to Walker.
A request is still pending to unseal the recording and release them publicly. Ware set Aug. 29 for a hearing to decide whether the tapes should be unsealed and made public.
Even though Ware has upheld Walker’s decision by denying the motion to vacate, the case remains pending on appeal and Prop 8 remains in effect. The U.S. Ninth Circuit of Appeals has asked the California State Supreme Court to evaluate whether defendants have standing to appeal the case. Hearings are expected as early as September.
U.S. Supreme Court
Nine trans activists arrested outside Supreme Court
Gender Liberation Movement organized demonstration against Skrmetti ruling
On Friday afternoon, nine transgender organizers and allies were arrested on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court for blocking the street and protesting the recent U.S. v. Skrmetti ruling.
The ruling, decided 6-3 by the conservative majority on Wednesday, upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors. The decision will allow states to pass laws restricting gender-affirming care for minors and further minimizes bodily autonomy.
The nine arrested were part of a larger group of more than 30 protesters wearing colors of the trans Pride flag— pink, blue, and white, — standing outside of the nation’s highest court. Organizers unfurled large cloths in pink, blue, and white, shared personal testimonies about how their gender-affirming care was a matter of life and death, released pink and blue smoke, and saw nine trans participants take their hormone replacement therapy.
The protest was led by the Gender Liberation Movement, an organization that “builds direct action, media, and policy interventions centering bodily autonomy, self-determination, the pursuit of fulfillment, and collectivism in the face of gender-based sociopolitical threats.” Among the nine arrested was GLM co-founder Raquel Willis.
Before being arrested, Willis spoke to multiple media outlets, explaining that this decision was an overreach of power by the Supreme Court.
“Gender-affirming care is sacred, powerful, and transformative. With this ruling in U.S. v. Skrmetti, we see just how ignorant the Supreme Court is of the experiences of trans youth and their affirming families,” said Willis. “Everyone deserves the right to holistic healthcare, and trans youth are no different. We will continue to fight for their bodily autonomy, dignity, and self-determination just like previous generations. No court, no law, no government gave us our power, and none can take it away.”
GLM co-founder Eliel Cruz also spoke to media outlets about the Skrmetti ruling, calling it “a historical moment of fascist attacks,” and encouraged the LGBTQ community to “organize and fight back.”
“As a cisgender man, I stand in solidarity with the trans community during these escalating attacks on their safety, well-being, right to exist in this world, and ability to live a future free of violence,” Cruz said. “I’m enraged at the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a ban on gender-affirming care for youth. My heart hurts for the families and young people who this will negatively impact and harm.”
The Washington Blade reached out to Capitol Police for comment.
A spokesperson said the nine activists were arrested for violating D.C. Code §22-1307 — “Crowding, Obstructing, or Incommoding” — on First Street, N.E., after receiving three warnings.
National
FDA approves new twice-yearly HIV prevention drug
Experts say success could inhibit development of HIV vaccine
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on June 18 approved a newly developed HIV/AIDS prevention drug that only needs to be taken by injection once every six months.
The new drug, lenacapavir, which is being sold under the brand name of Yeztugo by the pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences that developed it, is being hailed by some AIDS activists as a major advancement in the years-long effort to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the U.S. and worldwide.
Although HIV prevention drugs, known as pre-exposure prophylaxis medication or PrEP, have been available since 2012, they initially required taking one or more daily pills. More recently, another injectable PrEP drug was developed that required being administered once every two months.
Experts familiar with the PrEP programs noted that while earlier drugs were highly effective in preventing HIV infection – most were 99 percent effective – they could not be effective if those at risk for HIV who were on the drugs did not adhere to taking their daily pills or injections every two months. Experts also point out that large numbers of people at risk for HIV, especially members of minority communities, are not on PrEP and efforts to reach out to them should be expanded.
“Today marks a monumental advance in HIV prevention,” said Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute, in a statement released on the day the FDA announced its approval of lenacapavir.
“Congratulations to the many researchers who spent 19 years to get to today’s approval, backed up by the long-term investment needed to get the drug to market,” he said.
Schmid added, “Long-acting PrEP is now not only effective for up to six months but also improves adherence and will reduce HIV infections – if people are aware of it and payers, including private insurers, cover it without cost-sharing as a preventive service.”
Schmid and others monitoring the nation’s HIV/AIDS programs have warned that proposed large scale cuts in the budget for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by the administration of President Donald Trump could seriously harm HIV prevention programs, including PrEP-related efforts.
“Dismantling these programs means that there will be a weakened public health infrastructure and much less HIV testing, which is needed before a person can take PrEP,” Schmid said in his statement.
“Private insurers and employers must also immediately cover Yeztugo as a required preventive service, which means that PrEP users should not face any cost-sharing or utilization management barriers,” he said.
In response to a request by the Washington Blade for comment, a spokesperson for Gilead Sciences released a statement saying the annual list price per person using Yeztugo in the U.S. is $28,218. But the statement says the company is working to ensure that its HIV prevention medication is accessible to all who need it through broad coverage from health insurance companies and some of its own support programs.
“We’ve seen high insurance coverage for existing prevention options – for example, the vast majority of consumers have a $0 co-pay for Descovy for PrEP in the U.S. – and we are working to ensure broad coverage for lenacapavir [Yeztugo],” the statement says. It was referring to the earlier HIV prevention medication developed by Gilead Sciences, Descovy.
“Eligible insured people will get help with their copay,” the statement continues. “Gilead’s Advancing Access Copay Savings Program may reduce out-of-pocket costs to as little as zero dollars,” it says. “Then for people without insurance, lenacapavir may be available free of charge for those who are eligible, through Gilead’s Advancing Access Patient Assistance Program.”
Gilead Sciences has announced that in the two final trial tests for Yeztugo, which it describes as “the most intentionally inclusive HIV prevention clinical trial programs ever designed,” 99.9 percent of participants who received Yeztugo remained negative. Time magazine reports that among those who remained HIV negative at a rate of 100 percent were men who have sex with men.
Time also reports that some HIV/AIDS researchers believe the success of the HIV prevention drugs like Gilead’s Yeztugo could complicate the so-far unsuccessful efforts to develop an effective HIV vaccine.
To be able to test a potential vaccine two groups of test subjects must be used, one that receives the test vaccine and the other that receives a placebo with no drug in it.
With highly effective HIV prevention drugs now available, it could be ethically difficult to ask a test group to take a placebo and continue to be at risk for HIV, according to some researchers.
“This might take a bit of the wind out of the sails of vaccine research, because there is something so effective in preventing HIV infection,” Time quoted Dr. David Ho, a professor of microbiology, immunology, and medicine at New York’s Columbia University as saying.
National
Activists rally in response to Supreme Court ruling
‘We won’t bow to hatred: we outlive it’
Politicians, LGBTQ activists, and allies gathered at the Lutheran Church of the Reformation in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C. on Wednesday following the ruling by the United States Supreme Court in the case of U.S. v. Skrmetti. The Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming healthcare for transgender adolescents in a 6-3 decision.
A rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court was called for by the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and other organizations following the high court ruling on Wednesday. However, due to a thunderstorm and flood watch, the scores of activists who were to attend the rally were directed to a Lutheran church down the street from the court. Undeterred, activists and community leaders were joined by U.S. Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) for an indoor rally at the church.
“We know that freedom is not inevitable,” Markey told the crowd. “It is fought for by people who said ‘no’ in the face of health cuts, ‘no’ in the face of discrimination, ‘no’ in the face of invasive laws that ban life-saving and life-affirming healthcare and ‘no’ to this anti-justice, anti-freedom agenda.”
Also speaking at the rally was Deirdre Schifeling, chief political advocacy officer of the National ACLU.
“We believe transgender rights matter,” Schifeling stated. “Transgender kids matter and deserve love, support and the freedom to shape their own futures. I am still processing how the Supreme Court could disagree with such an obvious truth.”
“Today’s ruling shows us that unfortunately these attacks on our freedom will not end here,” Schifeling continued. “The Trump administration and extremist politicians across the country are continuing to target our right — our human right — to control our own bodies.”
“If politicians think that we are going to sit back and be defeated, that we are going to let them strip our rights and freedoms away without a fight, they’ve got another think coming,” Schifeling said. “We will never back down. We will never back down or give up. We will organize, we will mobilize and we will fight to protect trans rights in our communities, in our legislatures, in our elections, and in court rooms across the country.”
“Today, the highest court in this land decided that the bodily autonomy of trans youth, specifically trans youth of Tennessee and states with bans harming youth across the country do not matter,” said trans advocate Hope Giselle-Godsey.
“The opponents of trans equality think that today is a victory, but history will remember it as a moment that sharpened us and not silenced us,” Giselle-Godsey continued.
“So yes, today we grieve for the people in those states where those bans exist, but we grieve in motion,” Giselle-Godsey said. “To the system that thinks that it won today, just like every other time before: you will lose again. Because we won’t bow to hatred: we outlive it. We out-organize it. We out-love it. We are still here and we are not finished yet.”
Nine trans activists arrested outside Supreme Court
Norton reintroduces bill to ban discrimination against LGBTQ jurors in D.C. Superior Court
PHOTOS: Goodwin Living Pride Parade
More books for Pride month
Baltimore Orioles Pride Night set for June 25
Supreme Court upholds ban on transgender care for minors
Juvenile arrested for anti-gay assault in D.C.
‘Lou’s Legacy’ to make TV debut next week
More than 15K people attend Baltimore Trans Pride
