Connect with us

National

House Dems enter fight in Calif. case against DOMA

Pelosi, Nadler lead group of 132 lawmakers

Published

on

Gay News, Washington Blade, Nancy Pelosi

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Blade photo by Michael Key)

A group of 132 House Democrats — led by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) — filed on Tuesday a friend-of-the-court brief against the Defense of Marriage Act to assist litigation challenging the anti-gay law.

The brief was filed before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Golinski v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Lambda Legal and Morrison & Foerster filed the suit on behalf of Karen Golinski, a court employee at the U.S. Ninth Circuit of Court of Appeals who’s seeking partner benefits for her spouse, but was denied them because of DOMA.

In addition to Pelosi and Nadler, Democrats who signed the amicus brief against DOMA include all members of Democratic leadership — including House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Assistant Minority Leader Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) — as well as Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, and all four openly gay members of Congress: Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jared Polis (D-Colo.) and David Cicilline (D-R.I.).

The Obama administration stopped defending DOMA in court in February 2011. The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, or BLAG, a House body convened by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), has since taken up defense of the anti-gay law in the administration’s stead.

The 30-page brief makes the case against Section 3 of DOMA, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, in several ways, emphasizing that BLAG doesn’t speak for the entirety of the U.S. House. House Democrats have pledged to file a brief in each case where BLAG acts to defend DOMA.

First, the lawmakers argue DOMA warrants heightened scrutiny because Congress has a history of targeting gay and lesbian Americans with discriminatory laws — a position that is held by the Obama administration.

House Democrats then argue that DOMA is unconstitutional because Congress hastily passed it in 1996 for political reasons and because the law undercuts Congress’ interest in protecting families and respecting state sovereignty.

“Congress did not proceed “cautiously” as BLAG now suggests, … but acted hastily, and in a manner that reflects the reality that, as a historically disfavored minority, gay men and lesbians have often been targeted for harm based on stereotypes, bias, and the unfortunate desire to create partisan wedge issues for political gain,” the brief states.

Shelbi Day, a staff attorney for Lambda Legal, said the brief filed by House Democrats “sends a powerful message” and would boost arguments that DOMA is unconstitutional.

“The brief filed by Democratic leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives, joined by 130 other House Members sends a powerful message and underscores just how problematic and unconstitutional DOMA is,” Day said. “As the brief points out, DOMA is not the rational result of impartial lawmaking but rather was enacted in haste with no legitimate government purpose. We welcome this brief and applaud the members of Congress who have signed it.”

It’s not the first time that House Democrats have filed a friend-of-the-court brief asserting DOMA is unconstitutional. In November, House Democrats filed a similar brief before the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals in the consolidated case of Gill v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management and Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

The appeals court has since issued a decision that the anti-gay law is unconstitutional. Late last month, Boehner appealed the First Circuit decision finding DOMA unconstitutional to the Supreme Court.

The names on this brief are almost identical to the previous brief, although there are some differences. Former Rep. Jay Islee signed the first brief but not the second because he’s since retired from Congress to run for governor of Washington State. Former Rep. Donald Payne of New Jersey signed the first brief, but died on March 6 as he was battling colon cancer.

But a new name on the brief is Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.). The lawmaker, a co-sponsor of the Respect for Marriage Act, wasn’t yet elected to office at the time the first brief was filed. Bonamici won a special election on Jan. 31.

Other parties have filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of the anti-gay law. Among them is one filed by Senate Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Republican attorneys general from 14 states; and another from Republican former U.S. attorneys general Edwin Messe and John Ashcroft.

Oral arguments in the Golinski case are set before the Ninth Circuit for the week of Sept. 10. The Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to consider the case along with Massachusetts v. HHS, but oral arguments will take place regardless before the Ninth Circuit in September because justices won’t be able to decide whether to hear the case until they return from summer recess in October.

NOTE: The last paragraph of this article has been edited for clarity.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

RFK Jr.’s HHS report pushes therapy, not medical interventions, for trans youth

‘Discredited junk science’ — GLAAD

Published

on

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A 409-page report released Thursday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services challenges the ethics of medical interventions for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, the treatments that are often collectively called gender-affirming care, instead advocating for psychotherapy alone.

The document comes in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order barring the federal government from supporting gender transitions for anyone younger than 19.

“Our duty is to protect our nation’s children — not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions,” National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said in a statement. “We must follow the gold standard of science, not activist agendas.”

While the report does not constitute clinical guidance, its findings nevertheless conflict with not just the recommendations of LGBTQ advocacy groups but also those issued by organizations with relevant expertise in science and medicine.

The American Medical Association, for instance, notes that “empirical evidence has demonstrated that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression.”

Gender-affirming care for transgender youth under standards widely used in the U.S. includes supportive talk therapy along with — in some but not all cases — puberty blockers or hormone treatment.

“The suggestion that someone’s authentic self and who they are can be ‘changed’ is discredited junk science,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement. “This so-called guidance is grossly misleading and in direct contrast to the recommendation of every leading health authority in the world. This report amounts to nothing more than forcing the same discredited idea of conversion therapy that ripped families apart and harmed gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people for decades.”

GLAAD further notes that the “government has not released the names of those involved in consulting or authoring this report.”

Janelle Perez, executive director of LPAC, said, “For decades, every major medical association–including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics–have affirmed that medical care is the only safe and effective treatment for transgender youth experiencing gender dysphoria.

“This report is simply promoting conversion therapy by a different name – and the American people know better. We know that conversion therapy isn’t actually therapy – it isolates and harms kids, scapegoats parents, and divides families through blame and rejection. These tactics have been used against gay kids for decades, and now the same people want to use them against transgender youth and their families.

“The end result here will be a devastating denial of essential health care for transgender youth, replaced by a dangerous practice that every major U.S. medical and mental health association agree promotes anxiety, depression, and increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts.

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice, and no amount of pressure can force someone to change who they are. We also know that 98% of people who receive transition-related health care continue to receive that health care throughout their lifetime. Trans health care is health care.”

“Today’s report seeks to erase decades of research and learning, replacing it with propaganda. The claims in today’s report would rip health care away from kids and take decision-making out of the hands of parents,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. “It promotes the same kind of conversion therapy long used to shame LGBTQ+ people into hating themselves for being unable to change something they can’t change.”

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice—it’s rooted in biology and genetics,” Minter said. “No amount or talk or pressure will change that.” 

Human Rights Campaign Chief of Staff Jay Brown released a statement: “Trans people are who we are. We’re born this way. And we deserve to live our best lives and have a fair shot and equal opportunity at living a good life.

“This report misrepresents the science that has led all mainstream American medical and mental health professionals to declare healthcare for transgender youth to be best practice and instead follows a script predetermined not by experts but by Sec. Kennedy and anti-equality politicians.”




Continue Reading

The White House

Trump nominates Mike Waltz to become next UN ambassador

Former Fla. congressman had been national security advisor

Published

on

U.N. headquarters in New York (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

President Donald Trump on Thursday announced he will nominate Mike Waltz to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N.

Waltz, a former Florida congressman, had been the national security advisor.

Trump announced the nomination amid reports that Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, were going to leave the administration after Waltz in March added a journalist to a Signal chat in which he, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other officials discussed plans to attack Houthi rebels in Yemen.

“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States ambassador to the United Nations,” said Trump in a Truth Social post that announced Waltz’s nomination. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role.”

Trump said Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as interim national security advisor, “while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department.”

“Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to make America, and the world, safe again,” said Trump.

Trump shortly after his election nominated U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Trump in March withdrew her nomination in order to ensure Republicans maintained their narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy

Two of seven plaintiffs live in Md.

Published

on

Lambda Legal on April 25 filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of seven transgender and nonbinary people who are challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy.

The lawsuit, which Lambda Legal filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Baltimore, alleges the policy that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers “has caused and is causing grave and immediate harm to transgender people like plaintiffs, in violation of their constitutional rights to equal protection.”

Two of the seven plaintiffs — Jill Tran and Peter Poe — live in Maryland. The State Department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the federal government are defendants.

“The discriminatory passport policy exposes transgender U.S. citizens to harassment, abuse, and discrimination, in some cases endangering them abroad or preventing them from traveling, by forcing them to use identification documents that share private information against their wishes,” said Lambda Legal in a press release.

Zander Schlacter, a New York-based textile artist and designer, is the lead plaintiff.

The lawsuit notes he legally changed his name and gender in New York.

Schlacter less than a week before President Donald Trump’s inauguration “sent an expedited application to update his legal name on his passport, using form DS-5504.”

Trump once he took office signed an executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers. The lawsuit notes Schlacter received his new passport in February.

“The passport has his correct legal name, but now has an incorrect sex marker of ‘F’ or ‘female,'” notes the lawsuit. “Mr. Schlacter also received a letter from the State Department notifying him that ‘the date of birth, place of birth, name, or sex was corrected on your passport application,’ with ‘sex’ circled in red. The stated reason was ‘to correct your information to show your biological sex at birth.'”

“I, like many transgender people, experience fear of harassment or violence when moving through public spaces, especially where a photo ID is required,” said Schlacter in the press release that announced the lawsuit. “My safety is further at risk because of my inaccurate passport. I am unwilling to subject myself and my family to the threat of harassment and discrimination at the hands of border officials or anyone who views my passport.”

Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.

Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.

Lambda Legal represented Zzyym.

The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.

Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January. Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.

A federal judge in Boston earlier this month issued a preliminary injunction against the executive order.  The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven trans and nonbinary people.

Continue Reading

Popular