National
Senate confirms lesbian to federal judiciary
Senators approve Nathan by 48-44 vote
The U.S. Senate confirmed on Thursday an out judicial nominee to become the second-ever open lesbian to sit on the federal bench.
Senators confirmed Alison Nathan, whom President Obama nominated in March for a seat on the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York, by a vote of 48-44.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said on the Senate floor there was “no question the Senate should confirm Ms. Nathan.”
“As her resume shows, she is an accomplished nominee with significant experience in private practice, academia and government service,” Leahy said. “Twenty-seven former Supreme Court clerks have written to the Judiciary Committee in support of Ms. Nathan’s qualifications, including clerks who worked for the conservative Justices.”
Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, commended the Senate for confirming Obama’s nominee.
“The President welcomes the confirmation of Alison Nathan,” Inouye said. “She will serve the American people well from the District Court bench.”
Currently special counsel to the Solicitor General of New York, Nathan has also served as a special assistant to President Obama and an associate White House counsel. Before joining government service, she taught law first as a visiting assistant professor at Fordham University Law School, and later as a Fritz Alexander fellow at New York University School of Law.
All Democratic senators who were present voted in favor of the nomination. All Republicans who were present voted against her, including GOP senators known for holding pro-LGBT views, such as Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Scott Brown (R-Mass.).
Senators who didn’t vote were Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), David Vitter (R-La.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Joe Manchin (D-W.V.).
The Senate didn’t confirm Nathan without opposition on the floor. Republican senators spoke out against her.
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he voted to report Nathan’s nomination to the floor, but couldn’t vote for her on Thursday — as well as judicial nominee Judge Susan Hickey — because of their records and American Bar Association ratings.
“Ms. Nathan and Judge Hickey both have had limited experience in the courtroom,” Grassley said. “They have failed to meet even the minimum qualifications that the ABA uses in rating process.”
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who’s known for opposing pro-LGBT initiatives in Congress, also expressed concerns on the floor about Nathan’s legal experience and what he said was her belief that judges can look to foreign law in deciding cases.
“It’s very hard for me to believe that I should vote to confirm a judge who’s not committed to following our law, who believes they have a right to scrutinize the world, find some law in some other country, bring it home, and use that law to make it achieve a result in the case they wanted,” Sessions said.
Leahy defended Nathan’s nomination on the Senate floor, saying although her ABA recommendation wasn’t unanimous, a majority on the standing committee that evaluated her said she was qualified.
“I note that a majority of the Standing Committee rated Ms. Nathan ‘qualified’ to serve,” Leahy said. “I also note that Ms. Nathan’s ABA rating is equal to or better than the rating received by 33 of President Bush’s confirmed judicial nominees, who were supported by nearly every Republican senator.”
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the claim that Nathan has made any assertion that she’d look to foreign law when deciding cases is “patently false.”
In a questionnaire response to written questions from Grassley, Nathan wrote: “If I were confirmed as a United States District Court Judge, foreign law would have no relevance to my interpretation of the United States Constitution. In this area, as in all others, I would follow binding Supreme Court precedent.”
LGBT advocates praised the Senate for confirming Nathan and sending the third openly gay person to the federal bench.
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, hailed the confirmation and said additional representation of LGBT people in the courts is necessary.
“Alison Nathan’s demonstrated intellect and dedication to public service is a model of achievement for LGBT youth and we commend the Senate for their confirmation vote today,” he said. “With qualified LGBT attorneys all across the country, we look forward to the federal courts reflecting the diverse composition of our society in districts from coast to coast.”
Chuck Wolfe, CEO of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, called the Nathan confirmation “another step toward America’s leadership class reflecting the country it serves.”
“For too long Washington has ignored the impressive talent and experience found in the LGBT community,” Wolfe said. “It’s been beholden to the opinion of extremists who wanted to exclude us. We have to continue to fight against that kind of political homophobia, and we will.”
The first lesbian — and first openly LGBT person — to sit on the federal bench is Deborah Batts, who was nominated and confirmation for a position on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York during the Clinton Administration.
In July, the Senate confirmed J. Paul Oetken to another seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, making him the first openly gay male to sit on the federal bench.
Two other openly gay nominees are also pending before the Senate: Michael Fitzgerald, who was nominated for a position on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California; and Edward DuMont, who was nominated for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
The Senate Judiciary Committee held the confirmation hearing for Fitzgerald last week. The panel hasn’t reported out the nomination, but the record for committee members to submit follow up questions closed only this week.
Obama renominated DuMont in January after the 111th Congress took no action on his appointment. DuMont’s nomination has yet to be considered by the full Senate — or even the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
Congratulations to Gil Pontes III on his recent appointment to the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors, Fla. Upon being appointed he said, “I’m honored to join the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors at such an important moment for our community. In my role as Executive Director of the NextGen Chamber of Commerce, I spend much of my time focused on economic growth, fiscal sustainability, and the long-term competitiveness of emerging business leaders. I look forward to bringing that perspective to Wilton Manors — helping ensure responsible stewardship of public resources while supporting a vibrant, inclusive local economy.”
Pontes is a nonprofit executive with years of development, operations, budget, management, and strategic planning experience in 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and political organizations. Pontes is currently executive director of NextGen, Chamber of Commerce. NextGen Chamber’s mission is to “empower emerging business leaders by generating insights, encouraging engagement, and nurturing leadership development to shape the future economy.” Prior to that he served as managing director of The Nora Project, and director of development also at The Nora Project. He has held a number of other positions including Major Gifts Officer, Thundermist Health Center, and has worked in both real estate and banking including as Business Solutions Adviser, Ironwood Financial. For three years he was a Selectman, Town of Berkley, Mass. In that role, he managed HR and general governance for town government. There were 200+ staff and 6,500 constituents. He balanced a $20,000,000 budget annually, established an Economic Development Committee, and hired the first town administrator.
Pontes earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth.
Kansas
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
A new Kansas bill requires transgender residents to have their driver’s licenses reflect their sex assigned at birth, invalidating current licenses.
Transgender people across Kansas received letters in the mail on Wednesday demanding the immediate surrender of their driver’s licenses following passage of one of the harshest transgender bathroom bans in the nation. Now the American Civil Liberties Union is filing a lawsuit to block the ban and protect transgender residents from what advocates describe as “sweeping” and “punitive” consequences.
Independent journalist Erin Reed broke the story Wednesday after lawmakers approved House Substitute for Senate Bill 244. In her reporting, Reed included a photo of the letter sent to transgender Kansans, requiring them to obtain a driver’s license that reflects their sex assigned at birth rather than the gender with which they identify.
According to the reporting, transgender Kansans must surrender their driver’s licenses and that their current credentials — regardless of expiration date — will be considered invalid upon the law’s publication. The move effectively nullifies previously issued identification documents, creating immediate uncertainty for those impacted.
House Substitute for Senate Bill 244 also stipulates that any transgender person caught driving without a valid license could face a class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. That potential penalty adds a criminal dimension to what began as an administrative action. It also compounds the legal risks for transgender Kansans, as the state already requires county jails to house inmates according to sex assigned at birth — a policy that advocates say can place transgender detainees at heightened risk.
Beyond identification issues, SB 244 not only bans transgender people from using restrooms that match their gender identity in government buildings — including libraries, courthouses, state parks, hospitals, and interstate rest stops — with the possibility for criminal penalties, but also allows for what critics have described as a “bathroom bounty hunter” provision. The measure permits anyone who encounters a transgender person in a restroom — including potentially in private businesses — to sue them for large sums of money, dramatically expanding the scope of enforcement beyond government authorities.
The lawsuit challenging SB 244 was filed today in the District Court of Douglas County on behalf of anonymous plaintiffs Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Kansas, and Ballard Spahr LLP. The complaint argues that SB 244 violates the Kansas Constitution’s protections for personal autonomy, privacy, equality under the law, due process, and freedom of speech.
Additionally, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a temporary restraining order on behalf of the anonymous plaintiffs, arguing that the order — followed by a temporary injunction — is necessary to prevent the “irreparable harm” that would result from SB 244.
State Rep. Abi Boatman, a Wichita Democrat and the only transgender member of the Kansas Legislature, told the Kansas City Star on Wednesday that “persecution is the point.”
“This legislation is a direct attack on the dignity and humanity of transgender Kansans,” said Monica Bennett, legal director of the ACLU of Kansas. “It undermines our state’s strong constitutional protections against government overreach and persecution.”
“SB 244 is a cruel and craven threat to public safety all in the name of fostering fear, division, and paranoia,” said Harper Seldin, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “The invalidation of state-issued IDs threatens to out transgender people against their will every time they apply for a job, rent an apartment, or interact with police. Taken as a whole, SB 244 is a transparent attempt to deny transgender people autonomy over their own identities and push them out of public life altogether.”
“SB 244 presents a state-sanctioned attack on transgender people aimed at silencing, dehumanizing, and alienating Kansans whose gender identity does not conform to the state legislature’s preferences,” said Heather St. Clair, a Ballard Spahr litigator working on the case. “Ballard Spahr is committed to standing with the ACLU and the plaintiffs in fighting on behalf of transgender Kansans for a remedy against the injustices presented by SB 244, and is dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights jeopardized by this new law.”
National
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Top editorial staff let go last week
Former staff members at the Advocate and Out magazines revealed that parent company Equalpride laid off a number of employees late last week.
Those let go included Advocate editor-in-chief Alex Cooper, Pride.com editor-in-chief Rachel Shatto, brand partnerships manager Erin Manley, community editor Marie-Adélina de la Ferriére, and Out magazine staff writers Moises Mendez and Bernardo Sim, according to a report in Hollywood Reporter.
Cooper, who joined the company in 2021, posted to social media that, “Few people have had the privilege of leading this legendary LGBTQ+ news outlet, and I’m deeply honored to have been one of them. To my team: thank you for the last four years. You’ve been the best. For those also affected today, please let me know how I can support you.”
The Advocate’s PR firm when reached by the Blade said it no longer represents the company. Emails to the Advocate went unanswered.
Equalpride on Friday announced it acquired “Them,” a digital LGBTQ outlet founded in 2017 by Conde Nast.
“Equalpride exists to elevate, celebrate and protect LGBTQ+ storytelling at scale,” Equalpride CEO Mark Berryhill said according to Hollywood Reporter. “By combining the strengths of our brands with this respected digital platform, we’re creating a unified ecosystem that delivers even more impact for our audiences, advertisers, and community partners.”
It’s not clear if “Them” staff would take over editorial responsibilities for the Advocate and Out.
Comings & Goings
Kansas passes bathroom bounty hunter bill
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Spring into sold
New book profiles LGBTQ Ukrainians, documents war experiences
PHOTOS: Queen of Hearts
Two very different views of the State of the Union
Va. activists preparing campaign in support of repealing marriage amendment
