Connect with us

National

U.S. officials dispute media reports on Uganda anti-gay bill

Embassy says legislation not yet out of committee

Published

on

Department of State, gay news, Washington Blade

U.S. officials offered a different account about the status of a draconian anti-gay bill in Uganda on Tuesday, saying the legislation had yet to move out of committee and disputing earlier media reports and State Department comments by sayingĀ the panel is incapable of removing the infamous death penalty provision from the legislation.

In an email to the Washington Blade on Tuesday,Ā an informed source at the U.S. Embassy in Kampala said the bill is still in committee. That contradicts media reports on the bill ā€” which imposes a penalty of life in prison for homosexual acts ā€” that indicated theĀ Legal & Parliamentary Affairs Committee hadĀ reported out the bill last week.

Additionally, the embassy source, who asked not to be named, said that the committee can only compile a report on the bill for recommendations to the bill, and can’t make changes to it. That means the panel can’t take out the death penalty provision for “aggravated homosexuality,” which media sources reported was removed.

AnĀ earlier version of the bill defined “aggravated homosexuality”Ā as someone with HIV engaging in homosexual acts, having homosexual sex with a minor or the repeated offense of homosexuality.

Nicole Thompson, a State Department spokesperson, affirmed on Tuesday when speaking with the Washington Blade over the phone that the legislation had yet to pass in committee.

“As with all domestic legislation, it’s up to the Ugandan Parliament to determine whether or not to move forward with a bill,” Thompson said. “The bill is currently in committee and has not yet reached the full parliament for consideration.”

On Monday, Victoria Nuland, a State Department spokesperson, affirmed media reports that the bill had passed committee, saying during a daily press briefing, “Our understanding is that a version of the bill has now passed the committee in Uganda.ā€ Thompson on Tuesday said Nuland may have misspoke when making those comments.

Thompson referred questions about whether the committee has authority to make changes to the legislation or take out the death penalty provision to the Uganda government. Additionally, she said she couldn’t answerĀ questions about expectations for the timing of when the bill might pass out of committee and be taken up by the full parliament.

Advocates have said the vote could happen as soon as this week, but are hoping action is delayed beyond Dec. 14, when the legislative session ends.

Additionally, Thompson articulated previously stated concerns that the United States has with the legislation.

“The United States shares the concerns of several members of Uganda’s civil society and the Ugandan government’s own human rights commission, which determined the anti-homosexuality bill violates both Uganda’s constitution and its obligations under international law,” Thompson said. “Beyond that, we have serious concerns about the negative impact of the bill on public health interests in Uganda, including our concerns that it would undercut Uganda’s ability to fight HIV/AIDS infection and the spread of HIV/AIDS.”

Thompson added, “We just note that as President Obama said in reference to the same anti-homosexuality bill in his comments during the National Prayer Breakfast, it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are.”

Following talks that Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Johnnie Carson had with high-profile leaders over the weekend in Uganda, Thompson said diplomatic outreach to the Ugandan government continues,Ā although she wasn’t immediately sure whether these talks involve Carson or other diplomats.

“Even if Assistant Secretary Carson hasn’t spoken with them beyond that ā€” I think right now he’s in the Democratic Republic of Congo ā€” our diplomatic offices, they’re on the ground in Uganda,” Thompson said. “Even though I’m not there, I can pretty assuredly say that this is an issue of ongoing and continual dialogue between our government … and the government of Uganda.”

Thompson declined to comment on the response that Ugandan officials offered to U.S. officials, saying, “We generally don’t provide a play-by-play on our diplomatic exchanges, so I can’t tell you exactly what the Ugandans said to him. But this is an issue that is of great concern, of course, to the U.S. government because that doesn’t embody the principles that we extol across the globe, and they don’t live up to the universally accepted standards for human rights.”

In 2009, the Washington Blade reportedĀ that Carson met with President Yoweri Museveni about the bill and later had conversations about it on the phone. On both occasions, the State Department said at the time Museveni had pledged to block the bill from becoming law and would veto it if it came to his desk.

UPDATE: During the State Department daily briefing on Tuesday, Nuland corrected herself by saying the anti-gay bill hasn’t yet passed out of committee, adding she believes Museveni “took onboard” the potential negative impact of the bill during his talks with Carson.

The transcript of that portion of the briefing follows:

QUESTION: Do you have anything to add to what ā€“ the Uganda answer you gave yesterday? Has there been any more contact, do you know, between ā€“ since Ambassador ā€“ since Assistant Secretary Carson was there on this ā€“ the anti-homosexuality law?

MS. NULAND: Just a little bit more on Assistant Secretary Carsonā€™s conversation: He did talk to parliamentary leaders and to President Museveni very directly about our concerns, the concerns of the international community. Our understanding is that President Museveni certainly took onboard the fact that this could have a serious impact on the way Uganda is perceived, the way Uganda is supported in the international community. There are many hoops for this thing to go through, as you know. I think yesterday we said that the bill had passed the parliamentary committee. My understanding is thatā€™s incorrect. It hasnā€™t even gotten to that stage. So we just need to continue to highlight the issues.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

Karine Jean-Pierre becomes Biden’s fourth openly LGBTQ senior adviser

Press secretary’s promotion was reported on Monday

Published

on

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre (Washington Blade photo by Christopher Kane)

Following White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre’s promotion to a top role on Monday, four of the 10 officials serving as senior advisers to President Joe Biden are openly LGBTQ.

The other LGBTQ members of the president’s innermost circle are White House Communications Director Ben LaBolt, senior adviser to first lady Jill Biden Anthony Bernal, and White House Director of Political Strategy and Outreach Emmy Ruiz.

Jean-Pierre became the first Black and the first LGBTQ White House press secretary in May 2022. She spoke with the Washington Blade for an exclusive interview last spring, shortly before the two-year anniversary of her appointment to that position.

“Jill and I have known and respected Karine a long time and she will be a strong voice speaking for me and this Administration,” Biden said in 2022 when announcing her as press secretary.

Breaking the news of Jean-Pierre’s promotion on Monday, ABC noted the power and influence of the White House communications and press office, given that LaBolt was appointed in August to succeed Anita Dunn when she left her role as senior adviser to the president.

As press secretary, Jean-Pierre has consistently advocated for the LGBTQ community ā€” pushing back forcefully on anti-LGBTQ legislation and reaffirming the president and vice president’s commitments to expanding rights and protections.

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court begins fall term with major gender affirming care case on the docket

Justices rule against Biden admin over emergency abortion question

Published

on

The Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022 to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, The Supreme Court of the U.S.)

The U.S. Supreme Court’s fall term began on Monday with major cases on the docket including U.S. v Skrmetti, which could decide the fate of 24 state laws banning the use of puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors.

First, however, the justices dealt another blow to the Biden-Harris administration and reproductive rights advocates by leaving in place a lower court order that blocked efforts by the federal government to allow hospitals to terminate pregnancies in medical emergencies.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services had issued a guidance instructing healthcare providers to offer abortions in such circumstances, per the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which kicked off litigation over whether the law overrides state abortion restrictions.

The U.S. Court of appeals for the 5th Circuit had upheld a decision blocking the federal government from enforcing the law via the HHS guidance, and the U.S. Department of Justice subsequently asked the Supreme Court to intervene.

The justices also declined to hear a free speech case in which parents challenged a DOJ memo instructing officials to look into threats against public school officials, which sparked false claims that parents were being labeled “domestic terrorists” for raising objections at school board meetings over, especially, COVID policies and curricula and educational materials addressing matters of race, sexuality, and gender.

Looking to the cases ahead, U.S. v. Skrmetti is “obviously the blockbuster case of the term,” a Supreme Court practitioner and lecturer at the Harvard law school litigation clinic told NPR.

The attorney, Deepak Gupta, said the litigation “presents fundamental questions about the scope of state power to regulate medical care for minors, and the rights of parents to make medical decisions for your children.”

The ACLU, which represents parties in the case, argues that Tennessee’s gender affirming care ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by allowing puberty blockers and hormone treatments for cisgender patients younger than 18 while prohibiting these interventions for their transgender counterparts.

The organization notes that “leading medical experts and organizations ā€” such as the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics ā€” oppose these restrictions, which have already forced thousands of families across the country to travel to maintain access to medical care or watch their child suffer without it.”

When passing their bans on gender affirming care, conservative states have cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), which overturned constitutional protections for abortion that were in place since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973.

The ACLU notes “U.S. v. Skrmetti will be a major test of how far the court is willing to stretch Dobbs to allow states to ban other health care” including other types of reproductive care like IVF and birth control.

Also on the docket in the months ahead are cases that will decide core questions about the government’s ability to regulate “ghost guns,” firearms that are made with build-it-yourself kits available online, and the constitutionality of a Texas law requiring age verification to access pornography.

The latter case drew opposition from liberal and conservative groups that argue it will have a chilling effect on adults who, as NPR wrote, “would realistically fear extortion, identity theft and even tracking of their habits by the government and others.”

Continue Reading

National

Lesbian software developer seeks to preserve lost LGBTQ history

Published

on

ā€˜There's so much history, and we have to transfer it to the digital,ā€™ says Kristen Gwinn-Becker.

Up until the early 2010s, if you searched ā€œBabe Ruthā€ in the Baseball Hall of Fame, nothing would pop up. To find information on the greatest baseball player of all time, you would have to search ā€œRuth, George Herman.ā€ 

That is the way online archival systems were set up and there was a clear problem with it. Kristen Gwinn-Becker was uniquely able to solve it. ā€œI’m a super tech geek, history geek,ā€ she says, ā€œI love any opportunity to create this aha moment with people through history.ā€ 

Gwinn-Becker is the founder and CEO of HistoryIT, a company that helps organizations create digital archives that are genuinely accessible. ā€œI believe history is incredibly important, but I also think it’s in danger,ā€ she says. ā€œLess than 2% of our historical materials are digital and even less of that is truly accessible.ā€

Gwinn-Beckerā€™s love for history is personal. As a lesbian, growing up, she sought out evidence of herself across time. ā€œI was interested in stories, interested in people whose lives mirrored mine to help me understand who I was.ā€ 

ā€œ[My identity] influences my love of history and my strong belief in history is important,ā€ she says.

Despite always loving history, Gwinn-Becker found herself living and working in San Francisco during the early dot com boom and bust in the ā€˜90s. ā€œIt was an exciting time,ā€ she recounts, ā€œif you were intellectually curious, you could just jump right in.ā€

Being there was almost happenstance, Gwinn-Becker explained: ā€œI was 20 years old and wanted to live in San Francisco.ā€ Quickly, she fell in love with ā€œall of the incredible new tools.ā€ She was working with non-profits that encouraged her to take classes and apply the new skills. ā€œI was really into software, web, and database development.ā€ 

But history eventually pulled her back. ā€œTech was fun, but I didn’t want to be a developer,ā€ she says. Something was missing. When the opportunity to get a Ph.D. in history from George Washington University presented itself, ā€œI got to work on the Eleanor Roosevelt papers, who I was and remain quite passionate about.ā€ 

Gwinn-Beckerā€™s research on Eleanor Roosevelt planted the seeds of digital preservation. ā€œEleanor Roosevelt doesn’t have a single archive. FDR has lots but the first ladies donā€™t,ā€ she says. Gwinn-Becker wondered what else was missing from the archive ā€” and what would be missing from the archive if we didnā€™t start preserving it now.

Those questions eventually led Gwinn-Becker to found HistoryIT in 2011. Since then, the company has created digital archives for organizations ranging from museums and universities to sororities, fraternities, and community organizations.

This process is not easy. ā€œDigital preservation is more than scanning,ā€ says Gwinn-Becker. ā€œMost commercial scannersā€™ intent is to create a digital copy, not an exact replica.ā€ 

To digitally preserve something, Gwinn-Beckerā€™s team must take a photo with overhead cameras. ā€œThere is an international standard,ā€ she says, ā€œyou create an archival TIFF.ā€ 

ā€œItā€™s the biggest possible file we can create now. Thatā€™s how you future-proof.ā€

Despite the common belief that the internet is forever, JPEGs saved to social media or websites are a poor archive. ā€œItā€™s more expensive for us to do projects in the 2000 to 2016 period than to do 19th-century projects,ā€ explains Gwinn-Becker, since finding adequate files for preservation can be tricky. ā€œThe images themselves are deteriorated because they’re compressed so much,ā€ she says.

Her clients are finding that having a strong digital archive is useful outside of the noble goal of protecting history. ā€œIt’s a unique trove of content,ā€ says Gwinn-Becker. One client saw a 790% increase in donations after incorporating the digital archive into fundraising efforts. ā€œItā€™s important to have content quickly and easily,ā€ says Gwinn-Becker, whose team also works with clients on digital strategy for their archive.

One of Gwinn-Beckerā€™s favorite parts of her job is finding what she calls ā€œhidden histories.ā€

ā€œWe [LGBTQ people] are represented everywhere. We’re represented in sports, in religious history, in every kind of movement, not only our movement. I’m passionate about bringing those stories out.ā€ 

Sometimes queer stories are found in unexpected places, says Gwinn-Becker. ā€œWe work with sororities and fraternities. There are a hell of a lot of our stories there.ā€

Part of digital preservation is also making sure that history being created in the moment is not lost to future generations. HistoryIT works with NFL teams, for example. One of their clients is the Panthers, who hired Justine Lindsay, the first transgender cheerleader in the NFL. Gwinn-Becker was excited to be able to preserve information about Lindsay in the digital record. ā€œItā€™s making history in the process of preserving it,ā€ says Gwinn-Becker.

Preserving queer history, either through ā€œhidden historiesā€ or LGBTQ-specific archives, is vital says Gwinn-Becker. ā€œThink about whose history gets marginalized, whose history gets moved to the sidelines, whose history gets just erased,ā€ she prompts. ā€œIn a time of fake news, we need to point to evidence in the past. Queer people have existed since there were humans, but their stories are hidden,ā€ Gwinn-Becker says.

Meanwhile, Gwinn-Becker accidentally finds herself as part of queer history too. Listed as one of Inc. Magazineā€™s Top 250 Female Founders of 2024, she is surrounded by names like Christina Aguilera, Selena Gomez, and Natalie Portman. 

One name stuck out. ā€œNever in my life did I think I’d be on the same list ā€“ other than the obvious one ā€“ with Billie Jean King. That’s pretty exciting,ā€ she said. 

But she canā€™t focus on the win for too long. ā€œWhen I go to sleep at night, I think ā€˜there’s so much history, and we have to transfer it to the digital,ā€™ā€ she says, ā€œWe have a very small period in which to do that in a meaningful way.ā€

(This story is part of the Digital Equity Local Voices Fellowship lab through News is Out. The lab initiative is made possible with support from Comcast NBCUniversal.)

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular