Connect with us

National

Gay judge criticized in conservative congressional scorecard

FRC, CitizenLink rank members of Congress on anti-gay votes

Published

on

U.S. District Judge Michael Fitzgerald

Michael Fitzgerald (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Anti-gay groups are decrying the Senate confirmation of a gay federal judge as part of their annual congressional scorecard evaluating the commitment of House and Senate lawmakers to social conservative values.

The scorecard, a joint publication of the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family’s CitizenLink, was made public late Sunday night.

For the Senate, the scorecard rates members on the basis of seven votes over the course of this year — including the confirmation of U.S. District Judge Michael Fitzgerald, who was approved overwhelmingly in March by a 91-6 vote. The scorecard says, “FRC Action and CitizenLink Opposed this Confirmation.”

The scorecard doesn’t explicitly mention that Fitzgerald is gay, but says he “supported liberal activist organizations and worked to promote homosexual rights in the state of his judgeship.” The anti-gay groups cast in a negative light Fitzgerald’s work benefiting the LGBT community prior to his confirmation as a judge and accuse him of withholding information about his past in the questionnaire response he submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee:

Nominated on July 20, 2011, by President Barack Obama to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Mr. Fitzgerald has supported liberal activist organizations and worked to promote homosexual rights in the state of his judgeship. Mr. Fitzgerald supported activist organizations, such as the Harvard-Radcliffe Gay and Lesbian Caucus that opposed ROTC recruiting at Harvard at the same time now-Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was Dean at Harvard Law and refused to allow ROTC recruiters on campus. Mr. Fitzgerald also provided pro-bono work in the 1990 case, Buttino v. F.B.I., in which an FBI agent alleged he was wrongfully dismissed for his sexual preference only to be shown during the case to have lied during an FBI investigation. Mr. Fitzgerald also worked to oppose Proposition 8 in California and failed to mention many of his actions in a questionnaire to the Senate that would have revealed potential conflicts of interest.

Other LGBT-relevant votes by which the scorecard evaluates members of the Senate include passage in April of a bill with explicit LGBT-protections to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. The anti-gay group says the Senate version of the legislation “would discriminate against religious grantees who aid abused women if the grantees are opposed to homosexual behavior as a matter of faith.”

Additionally, the scorecard includes the cloture vote that led to the confirmation of Mari Carmon Aponte as U.S. ambassador to El Salvador. She came under fire from social conservatives in part because of a pro-gay op-ed piece she wrote for an El Salvador newspaper during the month of Pride.

Five senators managed a perfect score of “100 percent” as a result of the scorecard: Sens. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), James Inhofe, (R-Okla.), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

Fred Sainz, vice president of communications at the Human Rights Campaign, responded to the scorecard by invoking former President Reagan and saying the document reflects the Family Research Council’s continued hostility to the LGBT community.

“There they go again,” Sainz said. “Beyond death and taxes, the only other thing that you should count on is that FRC will falsely — and often hatefully – misinterpret issues important to LGBT equality. Their scorecard provides excellent examples of their bizarre animus against members of our community.”

Sainz took issue with the scorecard’s inclusion of the Fitzgerald confirmation vote, noting many Republican senators voted to confirm the judge.

“Despite the fact that Judge Fitzgerald was confirmed by a bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate (to include Republican senators from Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and Texas; not to mention Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and Senators McCain and Ayotte), FRC still is hell-bent on the notion that Fitzgerald is out of the mainstream,” Sainz said. “With every passing day, it becomes clearer that it’s FRC that’s out of the mainstream and in fact, painfully representative of an era of discrimination and bigotry.”

Sainz added he expects HRC to issue its own scorecard in late October.

For the House, six votes are included in scorecard, including votes on measures that would restrict abortion rights and repeal health care reform as well as a measure reaffirming the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The measure was an amendment to Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations legislation offered by freshman Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) and approved by a vote of 245-171.

But scorecard misstates the practical effect of that amendment, saying the measure would stop the Justice Department from litigating against DOMA in court — a path the Obama administration has followed after declining to defend DOMA. Media reports had previously indicated that Huelskamp intended to offer an amendment to that effect, but the measure ended up saying no federal funds could be used to contravene DOMA, which would do nothing to prevent the Justice Department from presenting the view of the federal government in court that DOMA is unconstitutional.

The Huelskamp amendment isn’t the only one reaffirming DOMA that was offered on the House floor this year. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) submitted a similar amendment that passed on the House floor as part of a defense spending measure. It’s unclear why the scorecard doesn’t includes this vote as part of its evaluation of House lawmakers.

More than 100 members of the Republican-controlled House are credited with voting each time with views consistent with the Family Research Council and CitizenLink, including Reps. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.), Allen West (R-Fla.) and Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.).

FRC didn’t immediately respond to questions about the scorecard.

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