Connect with us

National

Advocates still pushing Obama on exec order

Mixed views on whether White House will change course

Published

on

Tico Almeida, executive director of Freedom to work, said heā€™s hopeful that President obama will change course and sign an executive order barring workplace discrimination against LGBT employees of federal contractors. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

LGBT advocates and lawmakers on Capitol Hill continue to press President Obama to issue an executive order barring LGBT workplace discrimination among federal contractors, despite the announcement that the directive won’t happen at this time.

Though the pressure continues, there are mixed views about whether a change of course is likely to happen during Obama’s first term.

A Senate Democratic aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said “more than one Democratic office” on Capitol Hill is pushing the White House to reconsider the decision not to issue the executive order, althoughĀ the source wouldn’t identify which offices were speaking with the White House.

“There are ongoing discussions, and I think there’s going to be senator-level discussions,” the aide said.

Asked what the response has been from the administration, the aide said White House officials weren’t “too sympathetic to the notion that the president should issue the executive order,” but predicted pressure from Capitol Hill would “grow louder and louder.”

The aide said Obama could still issue the executive order before the end of this term, saying, “I think there’s more than enough wiggle room that the White House has left itself.”

Advocates were told on April 11 during a high-level White House meeting that Obama wouldn’t issue such a directive at this time and prefers to pursue passage of legislation to address the issue known as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) criticized the White House publicly in a statement, and disappointment was echoed by Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who circulated a letter among colleagues that urged Obama to sign the directive. Gay Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) said he wished the president “was a little more aggressive” in combatting workplace discrimination in an interview with Roll Call.

Several LGBT advocates echoed the feeling that the fight is not over on the executive order and that the administration could issue the directive before the year is out.

“It is my understanding from conversations with Hill staffers that their bosses are privately engaging the White House to explain to them the mistake that was made by delaying the executive order, and encouraging them to fix the mistake sooner rather than later,” saidĀ Tico Almeida, executive director of Freedom to Work.

Almeida said he’s engaged in meetings with White House staff and is proposing further discussions to address remaining concerns about the executive order. He plans to fly in from across the country LGBT victims of workplace discrimination to meet with senior officials and members of Congress.

“I’m optimistic that the White House staff will take this very seriously and I maintain some hope that President Obama will correct the mistake made by White House staff, who decided to delay the executive order,” Almeida said. “I maintain hope that the president will sign it in May or June.”

Jeff Krehely, vice president for LGBT programs at theĀ Center for American Progress, said his organization continues to have conversations with White House officials and has exchanged documentation about the executive order following the April 11 meeting.

“There have definitely been a couple of conversations thinking through whether there’s a need for additional research of perspectives on the problem,” Krehely said. “From CAP’s perspective, we’ve been clear that we’ve all in the advocacy community done quite a bit of research, shown the magnitude of the problem, the legal authority the president has to act on an executive order. I think we’re just having a conversation about making sure that everybody in all the different places in the administration is fully aware of all the research that’s been done to date on the issue.”

Brad Sears, executive director of the Williams Institute at the University of California Los Angeles, said his organization has taken part in meetings with administration officials on publicly available research the organization has showing businesses thrive when they have LGBT non-discrimination protections in place and that the executive order is legally sound.

“My impression from those meetings is the White House doesn’t have a question about either of those,” Sears said. “We believe that the policy research and the legal authority is there.”

According to a report published last week by the organization,Ā 86 percent of all federal contractors protect against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and 55 percent on the basis of gender identity.Ā The combined total means almost one-half of all federal contractors have LGBT protections, which amounts to more than $249 billion in federal spending.

Michael Cole-Schwartz, a spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, said his organization has joined in conversations with the White House on the executive order.

“Along with CAP and the Williams Institute, we are compiling all of our comprehensive materials for the White House that makes the case for this common-sense order,” Cole-Schwartz said. “While we continue to advocate for these workplace protections, we believe that the arguments have been ironclad even before we were informed that the White House would not be taking action at this time.”

A White House spokesperson didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Krehely added he thinks there’s room for Obama to issue the executive order during his first term because White House officials didn’t deliver a hard “no” during the April 11 meeting, but rather said they weren’t issuing the order at this time.

But other LGBT advocates, who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity to be more forthcoming on their views, weren’t as optimistic and didn’t see a path for the executive order this year.

“They have doubled down on their strategy on the executive order,” one advocate said. “I donā€™t believe they will reverse their course. I think the EO is done until after the election.”

According to the source, the decision has implications for Obama’s 18-month long “evolution” on marriage.

“With respect to marriage, there are a lot of cards still to be played, like the convention and the ballot states,” the advocate said. “Unfortunately, the mood has turned dire in that if they didnā€™t let the EO proceed, it stands to reason that the president wonā€™t announce a pro for marriage equality position before the election. I donā€™t know that for sure but it stands to reason.”

Another anonymous source who has an interest in building LGBT support for Obama in the election expressed a similar sentiment about the prospects for an executive order against workplace discrimination this term.

“The thing about executive orders is that he can issue them whenever he wants, but he’s not going to,” the source said. “In the meeting they made it very clear that they’re not going to do it.”

Another source with connections to the White House said political concerns played a role in the decision not to issue the executive order. According to the source, there are fears that issuing the order could give the impression that the White House is trying to bypass Congress and that such actions won’t play well in battleground states like Ohio, which could determine the outcome of the election.

In an interview with the Washington Blade last week, gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) expressed a similar sentiment.

ā€œI understand thereā€™s a lot on the plate politically,ā€ Frank said. ā€œAnd there are concerns now ā€” not about LGBT issues ā€” but thereā€™s a whole developing argument about his being too much unilateral. I donā€™t know if you saw the article in the New York Times about too much unilateral executive order, and I think that had more to do with it than the LGBT specifics.ā€

But two sources expressed confidence that Obama would issue the executive order in a second term if Congress fails to act on ENDA.

“I’d be very surprised if he didn’t do this in a second term, and I’d be very surprised if he didn’t come out for marriage in a second term,” one source said.

Since the April 11 meeting, Obama endorsed legislation that aims to protect LGBT students from bullying, known as the Student Non-Discrimination Act and the Safe School Improvement Act. Additionally, the Blade has learned that the White House plans to host another Pride celebration during the month of June.

Even so, some LGBT organizations have pledged to continue pressing for the executive order.

Heather Cronk, managing director for GetEQUAL, said her organization has had positive reactions in meetings that supporters have had with various Obama campaign offices on LGBT workplace discrimination.

“What we’ve discovered through those campaign actions is a lot of the campaign staff agreed with us that the president, the candidate they’re working for, should sign the executive order,” Cronk said. “It was clear to us that we didn’t actually want to do too hard-hitting action at some of those offices because we were finding that the staff and volunteers agreed with us.”

Supporters at Obama campaign offices in Virginia, Los Angeles, Austin and Laramie, Wyo.,delivered pens to campaign officials ā€” in case the president couldn’t find something to write with ā€” in a symbolic action to encourage the president to sign the order.

Next on the agenda for GetEQUAL, Cronk said, will be actions “more theatrical in nature” to drive the point less to the Obama campaign offices and more to campaign headquarters.

“The pressure isn’t letting off,” Cronk said. “We still have our foot on the gas and we still think there’s an opportunity for President Obama to do the right thing, and we’ll keep escalating until we either get another response from the White House with a more definitive ‘no,’ or get an affirmative response from the White House and see an executive signing in the next month.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Federal judge blocks Trump’s order restricting gender-affirming care for youth

Seven families with transgender, nonbinary children challenged directive

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A federal judge on Thursday issued a temporary restraining order that blocks President Donald Trump’s Jan. 29 executive order restricting access to gender-affirming health care for transgender people under age 19.

The order by Judge Brendan Hurson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, came in response to a request from the plaintiffs in a lawsuit, filed on Feb. 4, against Trump’s directive.

The plaintiffs are seven families with trans or nonbinary children. They are represented by PFLAG National, GMLA, Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Maryland, and the law firms Hogan Lovells and Jenner & Block.

Hurson’s temporary restraining order will halt enforcement of Trump’s order for 14 days, but it can be extended. This means health care providers and medical institutions can provide gender-affirming care to minor patients without the risk of losing federal funding.

Families in the lawsuit say their appointments were cancelled shortly after the executive order was issued. Hospitals in Colorado, Virginia, and D.C. stopped providing prescriptions for puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and other interventions for trans patients as they evaluated Trump’s directive.

The harms associated with suddenly withholding access to medical care for these patients were a major focus of Thursday’s hearing on the plaintiffs’ request for the temporary restraining order.

The president’s ā€œorder seems to deny that this population even exists, or deserves to exist,ā€ Hurson said, noting the elevated risk of suicide, poverty, addiction, and other hardships among trans people.

Continue Reading

National

Trumpā€™s trans erasure arrives at National Park Service

Fate of major 2016 LGBTQ Theme Study unclear

Published

on

NYC Pride participants in front of the Stonewall Inn in 2019. (File photo by Andrew Nasonov)

President Trumpā€™s efforts at erasing trans identity intensified this week as employees at the National Park Service were instructed to remove the ā€œTā€ and ā€œQā€ from ā€œLGBTQā€ from all internal and external communications.

The change was first noticed on the website of the Stonewall National Monument; trans people of color were integral to the events at Stonewall, which is widely viewed as the kickoff of the modern LGBTQ rights movement. The Stonewall National Monument is the first U.S. national monument dedicated to LGBTQ rights and history.

Reaction to that move was swift. New York City Council member Erik Bottcher wrote, ā€œThe Trump administration has erased transgender people from the Stonewall National Monument website. We will not allow them to erase the very existence of our siblings. We are one community!!ā€

But what most didnā€™t realize is that the removal of the ā€œTā€ and ā€œQā€ (for transgender and queer) extends to all National Park Service and Interior Department communications, raising concerns that the move could jeopardize future LGBTQ monuments and project work.

The Blade reached out to the National Park Service for comment on the trans erasure and received a curt response that the agency is implementing Trumpā€™s executive order ā€œDefending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Governmentā€ as well as agency directives to end all DEI initiatives.

The question being debated internally now, according to a knowledgable source, is what to do with a massive LGBTQ Theme Study, which as of Feb. 14 was still available on the NPS website. In 2014, the Gill Foundation recognized an omission of historic LGBTQ sites in the nationā€™s records, and the organization made a grant to the National Park Service to commission a first-of-its-kind LGBTQ Theme Study, which was published in 2016. It was a landmark project that represented major progress for the LGBTQ community in having our contributions included in the broader American story, something that is becoming increasingly difficult given efforts like ā€œDonā€™t Say Gayā€ laws that ban the teaching of LGBTQ topics in schools.

A source told the Blade that National Park Service communications staff suggested that removing chapters of the 2016 Theme Study that pertain to transgender people might placate anti-trans political appointees. But one employee pushed back on that, suggesting instead that the entire Theme Study be removed. Editing the document to remove one communityā€™s contributions and perspective violates the academic intent of the project, according to the source. A final decision on how to proceed is expected soon. 

Meanwhile, a protest is planned for Friday, Feb. 14 at noon at Christopher Park in New York City (7th Ave. S. and Christopher Street). The protest is being planned by staff at the Stonewall Inn. 

ā€œThe Stonewall Inn and The Stonewall Inn Gives Back Initiative are outraged and appalled by the recent removal of the word ā€˜transgenderā€™ from the Stonewall National Monument page on the National Park Service website,ā€ the groups said in a statement. ā€œLet us be clear: Stonewall is transgender history. Marsha P. Johnson, Sylvia Rivera, and countless other trans and gender-nonconforming individuals fought bravely, and often at great personal risk, to push back against oppressive systems. Their courage, sacrifice, and leadership were central to the resistance we now celebrate as the foundation of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement.ā€

Continue Reading

National

Victory Institute executive director speaks about movement response to Trump 2.0

Advocacy groups will lead efforts to push back against anti-LGBTQ administration

Published

on

LGBTQ Victory Institute Executive Director Elliot Imse speaks at the International LGBTQ Leaders Conference on Dec. 1, 2022. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trumpā€™s issuance of a series of executive orders targeting transgender rights and LGBTQ-inclusive diversity programs on the first day of his second term was a clear signal of the new administrationā€™s appetite for going after queer and gender diverse people.Ā 

The Jan. 20 directives also brought into focus the extent to which organizations in the LGBTQ movement, particularly those whose work includes impact litigation, will be responsible for protecting the communities they serve from harmful and discriminatory laws and policies over the next four years.

At a critical time that is likely to test the limits of their capacity, these groups are facing challenges that could restrict their access to critical resources thanks in part to the conservative movementā€™s opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion in both government and the private sector. 

LGBTQ organizations expected federal funding for their work would dry up when the incoming administration took over, given that Trump and his allies made no secret of their plans to aggressively reshape the government including by ridding U.S. agencies of all DEI-related programs, policies, and activities.Ā 

Trump went even further, however, issuing orders to categorically freeze the disbursement of government funds tied to preexisting grants and contracts, while threatening investigations of private companies for ā€œillegalā€ policies and practices related to DEI.

Partly in response to pressure from conservative leaders and activists, over the past couple of years companies have increasingly backed away from DEI efforts including, especially, support for LGBTQ communities and causes. 

Coupled with the loss of federal funding, a decline in corporate giving to LGBTQ organizations could have devastating impacts on the communities they serve, potentially leading to cutbacks in programs and services core to their missions or imperiling their efforts to push back against a hostile regime. 

ā€œContinuing to fund our work is obviously top of mind for everyone right now,ā€ Elliot Imse, executive director of the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute, told the Washington Blade during an interview last week.Ā Ā 

The move by many private companies away from supporting LGBTQ equality has been surprising, Imse said, but ā€œwhat we know is itā€™s a very uncertain environment for corporations right now, and they are feeling out these new realities.ā€ 

On the other hand, the moment also presents an opportunity to remind businesses that commitments to DEI are good for their bottom line while rewarding companies that resist pressure to abandon their LGBTQ customers, employees, and communities, Imse said. 

ā€œThere’s a lot of courageous corporations out there, too, right now, a lot that are continuing to step up. And we need to be grateful; we need to be making purchasing decisions as a community with those corporations in mind. Every corporation that has reaffirmed its commitment to us, we need to go out and support them.ā€ 

ā€œWhile Victory Institute ā€” like all LGBTQ+ organizations ā€” is concerned about the current fundraising environment, we have a programmatic plan in place that directly addresses the realities of what is happening across the country right now,ā€ he said, with programs to support LGBTQ elected officials serving everywhere from small municipal offices to the most powerful positions in government.Ā 

A diverse pipeline of out leaders from diverse backgrounds is the best bulwark ā€œagainst attacks on our equality and democratic backsliding,ā€ Imse said. ā€œWe have a very robust programmatic plan for 2025 ā€” and we need to execute on it at this critical moment.ā€

While the Victory Institute is currently looking for funding to support the organizationā€™s international work to compensate for the loss of federal grants, Imse said the group plans to expand U.S.-based programs, maximizing their reach at a time when this work is especially critical.Ā Ā 

ā€œWeā€™re going to be in more cities than ever before. Weā€™re going to have a larger training presence than ever before, including our LGBTQ+ Public Leadership Summits, which are specifically designed to inspire and recruit LGBTQ+ people to run for office. It is essential folks reject the demoralization of the current moment and that we have more boots on the ground to support those willing to step up and run.ā€ 

He added, ā€œwe are hopeful that we will be able to raise the money we need to carry these programs out, and we believe we can make the case to donors that these programs are an essential path forward.ā€ 

At the same time, Imse acknowledged that LGBTQ groups, including the Victory Institute, are in a difficult position at the moment and ā€œweā€™ll absolutely have to adjust if we see a downturn in fundraising throughout the year.ā€

ā€œit’s going to be an uphill battle, there’s no doubt about that. Like all other organizations, we’re going to watch the numbers and adjust as necessary,ā€ he said, adding, ā€œthe people we have at our organization are what makes our organization strong ā€” their expertise, their relationships, the networks that they’ve built.ā€ 

And while he said ā€œmaking sure that we meet the moment is something that keeps me up at night,ā€ Imse stressed that “figuring out how to balance the reality we are in versus optimism is something that is on everyone’s mind as you talk to LGBTQ+ community members, your staff, your fundersā€ who recognize that ā€œyou must have hope, because if people back away from our equality at this moment, it’ll be much worse than even the situation weā€™re in right now.ā€

There is no shortage of good reasons to hold onto hope, Imse said. ā€œOur movement has always thrived in moments of crisis. While weā€™d prefer no crisis, it refocuses us. It motivates us. And oftentimes leads to breakthroughs that we may not have had otherwise. It destroys complacency. It instills urgency.ā€

After Trump took office and the new Congress was sated with GOP majorities in both chambers, LGBTQ groups whose work includes lobbying or government relations understood their ability to influence policy at the federal level would be limited, at least until Democratic allies have the opportunity to retake control of the House in 2026.Ā 

The Victory Institute was especially well positioned to shift away from Washington, Imse said, because state legislatures, city councils, and school boards have always been the organizationā€™s ā€œbread and butterā€ and the elections for these positions ā€œtruly matterā€ even if they are less ā€œhigh profileā€ than U.S. congressional races.Ā 

ā€œWhen we’re talking about opportunities to make progress in the near future, opportunities to launch a successful offense and defense, it is in these legislative bodies,ā€ he said. ā€œAnd they arguably make more impact on individualsā€™ lives than the federal government does.ā€

Imse added this is especially true with regard to opportunities for legislative action to support LGBTQ Americans and defend their rights, which is unlikely to happen on Capitol Hill for a ā€œlong time.ā€ 

It is especially important now that LGBTQ communities and organizations support each other, he said. 

LGBTQ movement groups, particularly those with international focus, ā€œhave been phenomenal in bringing us together and trying to find out whatā€™s been done, keeping us up to date on potential litigation opportunities, as well as looking for funders that are willing to step up at this absolutely critical moment in our movementā€™s history,ā€ Imse said. 

ā€œWe also need our community to step up in terms of supporting these organizations,ā€ he said, ā€œfinancially through resources and capacity and giving their time, because that’s the only way we’re going to be able to move forward effectively.ā€

It is ā€œimportant that our community members remain active, engaged, and involved, and that our LGBTQ+ media continues to ensure our stories are being told,ā€ Imse said, adding, ā€œEspecially right now, this is an entire movement ecosystem that is working to make sure whatever backsliding is about to occur is not permanent.ā€

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular