National
WHAT A YEAR!
Our picks for the top national and international stories of 2013
(Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
It was perhaps the biggest year yet for the LGBT rights movement in the United States, as the Supreme Court made history by striking down Prop 8 and part of the Defense of Marriage Act. More states legalized marriage in its wake. Elsewhere in the world, the Catholic Church got a new pope who seemed to break with his predecessor over gay rights, among other issues.
Here are the Blade staff’s picks for the year’s top 10 national and international stories.
#1 Supreme Court strikes down DOMA, Prop 8
The plaintiffs in the Proposition 8 case at the Supreme Court emerge victorious with lawyer David Boies, Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin and American Foundation for Equal Rights Executive Director Adam Umhoefer. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a pair of historic decisions against the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8 in a news event we have dubbed the story of the year.
In a 5-4 decision, the court struck down Section 3 of DOMA, the 1996 Clinton-era law that prohibited the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage. In a separate 5-4 decision issued at the same time, the court ruled the proponents of Prop 8 couldn’t defend the initiative in court, allowing a district court ruling to stand that determined the 2008 amendment was unconstitutional.
Writing for the majority in the decision against DOMA, U.S. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy emphasized the harm the anti-gay law causes married same-sex couples.
“The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity,” Kennedy wrote. “By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment.”
The DOMA lawsuit was brought by New York widow Edith Windsor as a result of having to pay $363,000 in estate taxes in 2009 upon the death of her spouse, Thea Spyer. Windsor became a symbol of the marriage equality movement and was named by Time magazine as its No. 3 pick for “Person of the Year” after her victory at the Supreme Court.
The ruling against Prop 8 restored marriage equality to California. Thousands of same-sex couples — beginning with plaintiffs Kris Perry and Sandra Stier, who were wed by California Attorney General Kamala Harris at San Francisco City Hall — began to marry after the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals gave the go-ahead weeks after the decision.
Immediately after the ruling against DOMA, the Obama administration pledged to work toward implementing the decision to allow for the recognition of same-sex marriage by the federal government. At a news conference during a trip to Africa, President Obama pledged to make the federal benefits of marriage as widely available as possible.
“It’s my personal belief — but I’m speaking now as a president as opposed to as a lawyer — that if you’ve been married in Massachusetts and you move someplace else, you’re still married, and that under federal law you should be able to obtain the benefits of any lawfully married couple,” Obama said.
Then-Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano issued guidance saying bi-national same-sex couples would be able to apply for marriage-based green cards to enable them to stay in the United States. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management announced that spousal benefits, including health and pension benefits, would begin to flow to gay federal employees. Perhaps most significantly, the Internal Revenue Service announced it would recognize the marriages of same-sex couples for tax purposes — even if they file tax returns while living in a non-marriage equality state.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel also announced that service members in same-sex marriages would be able to receive spousal benefits, including health, pension and housing benefits. Several national guards with state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage said they would be unable to process these benefits, but after a second edict from Hagel saying they must comply, each of those states fell in line.
Within a few short months, the ruling against DOMA also helped accelerate the path toward marriage equality throughout individual states. In Ohio, a federal judge recognized the marriage of a same-sex couple that married at BWI airport because one of the partners in the relationship was dying of Lou Gehrig’s disease. Later, a New Jersey superior court ruled the state’s civil union law was insufficient — a decision the State Supreme Court let stand upon appeal from New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who later the dropped the lawsuit.
Doug NeJaime, a gay law professor at the University of California, Irvine, said this movement so soon after the Windsor ruling “was anticipated” given the language that Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy used in his opinion.
“Given the flurry of activity, and the quick decisions coming out of places like Ohio, this may mean that the Supreme Court may not be able to avoid the question regarding the constitutionality of state marriage bans as long as some of the justices may hope,” NeJaime said.
#2 States, countries extend marriage rights
Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie on Nov. 13, 2013, signed his state’s same-sex marriage bill into law. (Photo courtesy of State of Hawaii/Office of the Governor)
The movement for marriage rights for same-sex couples made significant advances in the U.S. and around the world in 2013.
In addition to Maryland and Delaware, gays and lesbians began to legally marry in California, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Minnesota and Hawaii. Illinois’s same-sex marriage law that Gov. Pat Quinn signed last month will take effect in June.
New Zealand and Uruguay also extended marriage rights to same-sex couples in 2013.
Brazil’s National Council of Justice in May nearly unanimously ruled that registrars in the South American country cannot deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Gays and lesbians in England and Wales on March 29 will begin to exchange vows after the British Parliament over the summer approved a same-sex marriage bill. An identical measure cleared its first hurdle in the Scottish Parliament last month.
The legal process to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples in Mexico continued to gain ground in Baja California, Guanajuato, Jalisco and other states in 2013. A handful of gays and lesbians have exchanged vows in Colombia, but the country’s attorney general has challenged some of them.
Croatian voters on Dec. 1 approved a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. The Australia High Court on Dec. 11 ruled a law that extended marriage rights to same-sex couples in the country’s capital is unconstitutional.
#3 Senate passes ENDA; House version stalls
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) spoke in a press conference following the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in the U.S. Senate. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key).
For the first time in history, the U.S. Senate approved with bipartisan support this year a long sought piece of legislation that would bar employers from discriminating against or firing workers based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
By a vote of 64-32, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act passed the Senate, marking the first time that either chamber of Congress has passed a version of the bill with protections for transgender workers. A total of 10 Republicans joined the entire Democratic caucus present in voting for the bill.
Prior to the vote, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), ENDA’s chief sponsor, delivered a speech on the Senate floor recognizing the historic nature of the moment.
“I look forward to this vote, this vote for liberty, this vote for freedom, this vote for opportunity, this vote for a fair and just America,” Merkley said.
Despite a push to bring up the legislation in the House, momentum on ENDA seems to have stalled as the legislation has capped out at 201 sponsors and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has continually said he opposes it.
“I understand people have differing opinions on this issue, and I respect those opinions,” Boehner said in response to a question from the Washington Blade. “But as someone who’s worked in the employment law area for all my years in the State House and all my years here, I see no basis or no need for this legislation.”
#4 Russia’s LGBT crackdown sparks outrage
Activists protested in front of the Russian embassy several times throughout the year following the passage of anti-gay laws in the country. (Washington Blade photo by Damien Salas)
The Kremlin’s LGBT rights crackdown sparked widespread outrage this past year amid preparations for the 2014 Winter Olympics that will take place in Sochi, Russia, in February.
Russian President Vladimir Putin in June signed a broadly worded bill into law that bans gay propaganda to minors. A second statute that bans foreign same-sex couples and any couple from a country in which gays and lesbians can marry from adopting Russian children took effect in July.
LGBT rights groups and other organizations that receive funding from outside Russia could face a fine if they don’t register as a “foreign agent.”
“These laws are aimed at driving LGBT people back into silence, back underground, back to the invisibility,” Polina Andrianova of Coming Out, a St. Petersburg-based LGBT advocacy group, told the Washington Blade during an August interview.
Playwright Harvey Fierstein is among those who have called for a boycott of the Sochi games in response to Russia’s LGBT rights crackdown. The International Olympic Committee and the U.S. Olympic Committee have also faced criticism from those who feel they have not done enough to publicly criticize the Kremlin over the gay propaganda law.
“The U.S. Olympic Committee has been complicit in this act of aggression because they say we respect Russia’s right to do this,” U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) told the Washington Blade in late September before the USOC added sexual orientation to its anti-discrimination policy. “That is not worthy of Olympic standards.”
Retired Olympic diver Greg Louganis on Dec. 13 told the Blade that gay MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts should not have co-hosted the Miss Universe 2013 pageant in November in Moscow. The four-time gold medalist also said gay singer Elton John should not have performed in Russia earlier this month.
“It just seems like all they’re doing is lending credibility to what’s going on there,” said Louganis.
#5 LGBT Catholics welcome Pope Francis
‘If a person is gay and seeks the Lord and is of good will, who am I to judge him,’ said Pope Francis. (Photo by Agência Brasil; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)
LGBT Catholics in 2013 welcomed Pope Francis’ more moderate tone toward gays.
The College of Cardinals on March 16 elected the former archbishop of Buenos Aires to succeed Pope Benedict XVI who abruptly resigned in February.
The Argentine pontiff said during a September interview with an Italian Jesuit newspaper that the Roman Catholic church has grown “obsessed” with nuptials for gays and lesbians, abortion and contraception. These comments came roughly two months after he told reporters as he returned to Rome after a weeklong trip to Brazil that gays and lesbians should not be judged or marginalized.
“If a person is gay and seeks the Lord and is of good will, who am I to judge him?” said Francis in response to a question about gay priests.
LGBT rights advocates in Argentina noted to the Washington Blade the pontiff categorized the same-sex marriage bill the country’s president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, signed in 2010 as “the work of the devil” that would “spark God’s war.”
Dignity USA Executive Director Marianne Duddy-Burke acknowledged Francis’ anti-LGBT statements after his election. She remains optimistic the new pontiff will welcome LGBT Catholics back into the church.
“We find much to be hopeful about, particularly in the Pope’s firm desire that the church be a ‘home for all people,’ and his belief that God looks on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people with love rather than condemnation,” said Duddy-Burke in a September statement.
#6 Obama names gay ambassadors, judges
John Berry was named U.S. Ambassador to Australia. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
The U.S. Senate approved this year several openly gay appointees — including the first openly gay federal appeals judge — in confirmations that were historic both in number and significance.
Among the confirmed appointees were five openly gay ambassadors, including former U.S. Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry as U.S. ambassador to Australia. The confirmation made him the first openly gay U.S. ambassador to a G-20 country.
Also among the gay confirmations were Daniel Baer as U.S. ambassador to Organization for Security & Cooperation in Europe; Rufus Gifford as U.S. ambassador to Denmark; James Costos as U.S. ambassador to Spain; and James “Wally” Brewster as U.S. ambassador to the Dominican Republic.
Additionally, the Senate confirmed Eric Fanning as under secretary of the Air Force. After the departure of his immediate boss shortly after the confirmation, Fanning became acting secretary of the Air Force, making him the highest-ranking openly gay civilian in the U.S. military.
Chai Feldblum, the lesbian member of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, was confirmed for a second term after leading the way for a ruling instituting transgender workplace non-discrimination protections.
The Senate also confirmed openly gay judicial nominees. The highest-ranking among them was Todd Hughes, who was confirmed as circuit judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He’s the first openly gay person to serve a federal appeals court.
The other confirmations were Pamela Ki Mai Chen as U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of New York; Michael McShane as U.S. District Judge for the District of Oregon; and Nitza Quiñones Alejandro as U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
#7 Trans protections recognized under Title IX
The Obama administration made a historic ruling for transgender rights this year by applying existing law to protect students in school on the basis of their gender identity.
The Departments of Education and Justice announced the resolution as a result of a complaint filed by the National Center for Lesbian Rights on behalf of a transgender student in California’s Arcadia Unified School District. The resolution requires the school district to treat the student as male in all respects and keep his transgender status private.
NCLR Staff Attorney Asaf Orr commended the Obama administration for taking the step “to ensure that schools are safe and supportive environments where all students can thrive, including transgender students.”
The resolution represents a growing legal and administrative trend to interpret existing law — in this case, Title IX of the Education Act of 1972 — to ban discrimination against trans people.
Prior to the ruling, the student was required to sleep in a cabin by himself on an overnight field trip instead of being allowed to room with his male peers. The school district also excluded the student from the boys’ restroom and locker room, insisting that he use the nurse’s office.
The student, who remained anonymous, said he’s glad his school district agreed to put in place the resolution proposed by the Obama administration.
“Knowing that I have the school district’s support, I can focus on learning and being a typical high school student, like my friends,” the student said.
#8 Obama references Stonewall in inaugural speech
In a first, President Obama made two references to gay rights during his inaugural address in January. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
President Obama stirred passions in the LGBT community by making an unprecedented reference to LGBT rights during his second-term inaugural address and saying he believes gay people deserve equal treatment under the law.
“Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law – for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well,” Obama said.
The words marked the first time that any U.S. president mentioned gay rights during an inaugural address and sent shockwaves through the LGBT community.
Also during the speech, Obama made a reference to the 1969 Stonewall riots, which are considered the start of the modern LGBT rights movement.
“We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths – that all of us are created equal – is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall; just as it guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great Mall, to hear a preacher say that we cannot walk alone; to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth,” Obama said.
#9: Gay mayors in Seattle, Houston; Quinn loses in New York
Lesbian Christine Quinn started her mayoral campaign a heavy favorite but ultimately lost in New York’s primary. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Lesbian Annise Parker won election to her third and final term as mayor of Houston, on Nov. 5, receiving a decisive 57 percent of the vote in a nine-candidate race.
In Seattle, Washington State Sen. Ed Murray defeated incumbent Mayor Mike McGinn by a margin of 56 percent to 43 percent to become that city’s first openly gay mayor.
And in Atlantic City, N.J., gay Republican Don Guardian shook up the political establishment by winning an upset victory over incumbent Mayor Lorenzo Langford, a Democrat, in a city where Democrats outnumber Republicans among registered voters by a nine to one margin. Guardian ran as a socially progressive reform candidate with a record as a highly competent administrator of services for the city’s tourist district.
Meanwhile, New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn lost her race to become New York’s first openly gay and first female mayor, finishing third in a hotly contested Democratic primary in September. A New York Times exit poll showed pro-LGBT candidate Bill deBlasio, who won the primary and the general election in November, beat Quinn among LGBT voters by a margin of 47 percent to 34 percent in a four candidate race.
Most political observers said LGBT voters joined the majority of their straight counterparts in backing deBlasio, who emerged as more progressive on economic issues than Quinn and who was perceived as an outspoken critic of incumbent Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is highly unpopular among Democratic voters. Quinn had long been viewed as a Bloomberg ally.
# 10 Manning gets 35 years, comes out as trans
Manning announced she is transitioning one day after being sentenced for leaking classified documents. (Public domain photo)
One day after a military judge sentenced former U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning to 35 years in prison for leaking classified documents to Wikileaks, the 25-year-old soldier released a statement through her attorney coming out as transgender.
“As I transition into this next phase of my life, I want everyone to know the real me,” Manning said. “I am Chelsea Manning. I am a female.”
Manning’s dramatic announcement shifted the media focus from that of her conviction in an Army court martial proceeding of violating the U.S. Espionage Act for leaking an unprecedented amount of classified information to the issue of who transgender people are and whether they should be entitled to equal rights.
Some transgender rights advocates said Manning’s case would hurt efforts to lift the military’s ban on transgender service members by casting transgender people in a negative light. Transgender activists Brynn Tannehill and Autumn Sandeen, who served in the military before transitioning, said they were especially troubled by arguments by Manning’s attorney that Manning’s struggle over her gender identity created stress that played some role in her decision to leak classified information.
“In my last four years in the Navy I was grappling with gender identity yet I did my job” and didn’t release classified information,” Sandeen said.
By Lou Chibbaro Jr., Chris Johnson and Michael Lavers
U.S. Supreme Court
Competing rallies draw hundreds to Supreme Court
Activists, politicians gather during oral arguments over trans youth participation in sports
Hundreds of supporters and opponents of trans rights gathered outside of the United States Supreme Court during oral arguments for Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. on Tuesday. Two competing rallies were held next to each other, with politicians and opposing movement leaders at each.
“Trans rights are human rights!” proclaimed U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) to the crowd of LGBTQ rights supporters. “I am here today because trans kids deserve more than to be debated on cable news. They deserve joy. They deserve support. They deserve to grow up knowing that their country has their back.”
“And I am here today because we have been down this hateful road before,” Markey continued. “We have seen time and time again what happens when the courts are asked to uphold discrimination. History eventually corrects those mistakes, but only after the real harm is done to human beings.”
View on Threads
U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon spoke at the other podium set up a few feet away surrounded by signs, “Two Sexes. One Truth.” and “Reality Matters. Biology Matters.”
“In just four years, the Biden administration reversed decades of progress,” said McMahon. “twisting the law to urge that sex is not defined by objective biological reality, but by subjective notion of gender identity. We’ve seen the consequences of the Biden administration’s advocacy of transgender agendas.”
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, was introduced on the opposing podium during McMahon’s remarks.
“This court, whose building that we stand before this morning, did something quite remarkable six years ago.” Takano said. “It did the humanely decent thing, and legally correct thing. In the Bostock decision, the Supreme Court said that trans employees exist. It said that trans employees matter. It said that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination based on sex, and that discrimination based on sex includes discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. It recognizes that trans people have workplace rights and that their livelihoods cannot be denied to them, because of who they are as trans people.”
“Today, we ask this court to be consistent,” Takano continued. “If trans employees exist, surely trans teenagers exist. If trans teenagers exist, surely trans children exist. If trans employees have a right not to be discriminated against in the workplace, trans kids have a right to a free and equal education in school.”
Takano then turned and pointed his finger toward McMahon.
“Did you hear that, Secretary McMahon?” Takano addressed McMahon. “Trans kids have a right to a free and equal education! Restore the Office of Civil Rights! Did you hear me Secretary McMahon? You will not speak louder or speak over me or over these people.”
Both politicians continued their remarks from opposing podiums.
“I end with a message to trans youth who need to know that there are adults who reject the political weaponization of hate and bigotry,” Takano said. “To you, I say: you matter. You are not alone. Discrimination has no place in our schools. It has no place in our laws, and it has no place in America.”
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court hears arguments in two critical cases on trans sports bans
Justices considered whether laws unconstitutional under Title IX.
The Supreme Court heard two cases today that could change how the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX are enforced.
The cases, Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., ask the court to determine whether state laws blocking transgender girls from participating on girls’ teams at publicly funded schools violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and Title IX. Once decided, the rulings could reshape how laws addressing sex discrimination are interpreted nationwide.
Chief Justice John Roberts raised questions about whether Bostock v. Clayton County — the landmark case holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity — applies in the context of athletics. He questioned whether transgender girls should be considered girls under the law, noting that they were assigned male at birth.
“I think the basic focus of the discussion up until now, which is, as I see it anyway, whether or not we should view your position as a challenge to the distinction between boys and girls on the basis of sex or whether or not you are perfectly comfortable with the distinction between boys and girls, you just want an exception to the biological definition of girls.”
“How we approach the situation of looking at it not as boys versus girls but whether or not there should be an exception with respect to the definition of girls,” Roberts added, suggesting the implications could extend beyond athletics. “That would — if we adopted that, that would have to apply across the board and not simply to the area of athletics.”
Justice Clarence Thomas echoed Roberts’ concerns, questioning how sex-based classifications function under Title IX and what would happen if Idaho’s ban were struck down.
“Does a — the justification for a classification as you have in Title IX, male/female sports, let’s take, for example, an individual male who is not a good athlete, say, a lousy tennis player, and does not make the women’s — and wants to try out for the women’s tennis team, and he said there is no way I’m better than the women’s tennis players. How is that different from what you’re being required to do here?”
Justice Samuel Alito addressed what many in the courtroom seemed reluctant to state directly: the legal definition of sex.
“Under Title IX, what does the term ‘sex’ mean?” Alito asked Principal Deputy Solicitor General Hashim Mooppan, who was arguing in support of Idaho’s law. Mooppan maintained that sex should be defined at birth.
“We think it’s properly interpreted pursuant to its ordinary traditional definition of biological sex and think probably given the time it was enacted, reproductive biology is probably the best way of understanding that,” Mooppan said.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor pushed back, questioning how that definition did not amount to sex discrimination against Lindsay Hecox under Idaho law. If Hecox’s sex is legally defined as male, Sotomayor argued, the exclusion still creates discrimination.
“It’s still an exception,” Sotomayor said. “It’s a subclass of people who are covered by the law and others are not.”
Justice Elena Kagan highlighted the broader implications of the cases, asking whether a ruling for the states would impose a single definition of sex on the 23 states that currently have different laws and standards. The parties acknowledged that scientific research does not yet offer a clear consensus on sex.
“I think the one thing we definitely want to have is complete findings. So that’s why we really were urging to have a full record developed before there were a final judgment of scientific uncertainty,” said Kathleen Harnett, Hecox’s legal representative. “Maybe on a later record, that would come out differently — but I don’t think that—”
“Just play it out a little bit, if there were scientific uncertainty,” Kagan responded.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh focused on the impact such policies could have on cisgender girls, arguing that allowing transgender girls to compete could undermine Title IX’s original purpose.
“For the individual girl who does not make the team or doesn’t get on the stand for the medal or doesn’t make all league, there’s a — there’s a harm there,” Kavanaugh said. “I think we can’t sweep that aside.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned whether Idaho’s law discriminated based on transgender status or sex.
“Since trans boys can play on boys’ teams, how would we say this discriminates on the basis of transgender status when its effect really only runs towards trans girls and not trans boys?”
Harnett responded, “I think that might be relevant to a, for example, animus point, right, that we’re not a complete exclusion of transgender people. There was an exclusion of transgender women.”
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson challenged the notion that explicitly excluding transgender people was not discrimination.
“I guess I’m struggling to understand how you can say that this law doesn’t discriminate on the basis of transgender status. The law expressly aims to ensure that transgender women can’t play on women’s sports teams… it treats transgender women different than — than cis-women, doesn’t it?”
Idaho Solicitor General Alan Hurst urged the court to uphold his state’s ban, arguing that allowing participation based on gender identity — regardless of medical intervention — would deny opportunities to girls protected under federal law.
Hurst emphasized that biological “sex is what matters in sports,” not gender identity, citing scientific evidence that people assigned male at birth are predisposed to athletic advantages.
Joshua Block, representing B.P.J., was asked whether a ruling in their favor would redefine sex under federal law.
“I don’t think the purpose of Title IX is to have an accurate definition of sex,” Block said. “I think the purpose is to make sure sex isn’t being used to deny opportunities.”
Becky Pepper-Jackson, identified as plaintiff B.P.J., the 15-year-old also spoke out.
“I play for my school for the same reason other kids on my track team do — to make friends, have fun, and challenge myself through practice and teamwork,” said Pepper-Jackson. “And all I’ve ever wanted was the same opportunities as my peers. But in 2021, politicians in my state passed a law banning me — the only transgender student athlete in the entire state — from playing as who I really am. This is unfair to me and every transgender kid who just wants the freedom to be themselves.”
Outside the court, advocates echoed those concerns as the justices deliberated.
“Becky simply wants to be with her teammates on the track and field team, to experience the camaraderie and many documented benefits of participating in team sports,” said Sasha Buchert, counsel and Nonbinary & Transgender Rights Project director at Lambda Legal. “It has been amply proven that participating in team sports equips youth with a myriad of skills — in leadership, teamwork, confidence, and health. On the other hand, denying a student the ability to participate is not only discriminatory but harmful to a student’s self-esteem, sending a message that they are not good enough and deserve to be excluded. That is the argument we made today and that we hope resonated with the justices of the Supreme Court.”
“This case is about the ability of transgender youth like Becky to participate in our schools and communities,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “School athletics are fundamentally educational programs, but West Virginia’s law completely excluded Becky from her school’s entire athletic program even when there is no connection to alleged concerns about fairness or safety. As the lower court recognized, forcing Becky to either give up sports or play on the boys’ team — in contradiction of who she is at school, at home, and across her life — is really no choice at all. We are glad to stand with her and her family to defend her rights, and the rights of every young person, to be included as a member of their school community, at the Supreme Court.”
The Supreme Court is expected to issue rulings in both cases by the end of June.
U.S. Supreme Court
As Supreme Court weighs trans sports bans, advocate and former athlete speaks out
PFLAG staffer Diego Sanchez competed at University of Georgia in 1970s
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear two cases Tuesday addressing the legality of banning transgender women and girls from participating in sports under the 14th Amendment.
Though the two cases differ slightly in their fact patterns, they ultimately pose the same constitutional question: whether laws that limit participation in women’s sports to only cisgender women and girls violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
In both cases — Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. — trans girls filed lawsuits against their respective states, Idaho and West Virginia, arguing that the bans violate their right to equal protection under the law by subjecting them to different standards than cisgender girls.
Lindsay Hecox, now 24, filed her lawsuit in 2020 while attending Boise State University. That same year, Idaho enacted the “Fairness in Women’s Sports Act,” which barred trans women from participating in any sport in public schools, from kindergarten through college. Although Hecox underwent hormone therapy that significantly lowered her testosterone levels, she was still excluded under the law when she attempted to try out for the women’s track and cross-country teams.
The second case centers on B.P.J., a 15-year-old trans girl who has identified as female since third grade and has been on puberty blockers since the onset of puberty. In 2021, West Virginia enacted the “Save Women’s Sports Act,” which requires sports teams to be designated by “biological sex” rather than gender identity. B.P.J.’s mother filed suit on her behalf after her daughter was barred from participating on her school’s girls’ cross-country and track teams.
A key distinction between the two cases is that attorneys for B.P.J. have argued that because puberty blockers were part of her development, her body is more aligned with that of a cisgender girl than a cisgender boy. Despite these differences, both cases raise the same constitutional issue: whether it is lawful to bar someone from participation in sports based on sex assigned at birth.
The Washington Blade spoke with PFLAG Vice President of Policy and Government Affairs Diego Sanchez.
Sanchez is a trans elder with firsthand experience as a college athlete at the University of Georgia and later became the first openly trans legislative staff member on Capitol Hill.
His dual experience — as a former athlete and a longtime policy expert deeply familiar with constitutional law — gives him a unique perspective on the questions now before the Supreme Court. Sanchez will also be one of the featured speakers at a rally on the steps of the court as the justices hear arguments.
When asked how attitudes toward trans athletes differ from when he competed at the University of Georgia from 1976-1980 to today — when 27 states have passed laws restricting trans participation in sports — Sanchez said the contrast is stark.
“I had the good experience of being supported by my teammates and my coach,” Sanchez said. “The thing that’s so different today is that these [trans] kids are able to go home and get kisses and hugs from their parents, being lauded in the stands by their families, and then being told that who they are doesn’t necessarily fit with who they’re allowed to be in their expression at the moment, and that to me, seems a terrible injustice.”
Sanchez emphasized that sports offer lessons that extend far beyond competition.
“When you’re an athlete, you learn an awful lot of things about life,” he said. “You learn about leadership, but you also learn that your best effort becomes part of a team effort … how you feel as an individual contributor is affected by what ends up being part of how you live your life as an adult.”
After his time as an athlete, Sanchez began working in government, eventually serving as senior policy advisor to then-U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) until Frank’s retirement in 2013. Sanchez said that one of the most important aspects of his role was simply being visible as a trans person in spaces where many lawmakers had never knowingly met one before.
“My job was to make sure that no one, no legislator, could say that they had never met a trans person,” Sanchez said.
Sanchez also addressed the broader implications the Supreme Court’s decision could have on how gender is treated within institutional systems.
“I don’t think it affects how people perceive their own gender or express their own gender, but I do think that it could create barriers if it doesn’t welcome the way that community and society actually are,” he said. “The most important thing for people to know … is to remember that every person is an individual, and that the right to contribute to society should be something that is supported by the government, not hindered.”
He added that the court’s role must be understood within the framework of checks and balances established by the Constitution.
“The risk, of course, here is always remembering that we have three branches of government, so that this action by the judiciary branch may or may not have implications on whether or how things can be perceived or executed at other branches,” Sanchez said. “I would hope that our government is interested in letting the future generations and current generations be the best that they can be as well.”
“Do people get to live their lives as they are, or is the government an obstruction or a support?”
When asked what message he would share with young trans athletes watching the Supreme Court take up these cases, Sanchez said community support remains critical, regardless of how the justices rule.
“Make sure that the environment that you put yourself in is something that honors who you know you are and supports you becoming the best person you can be, and that anything that takes away from that is purely dissonance,” he said.
“What we do with dissonance is what distinguishes us as whether we excel or doubt.”
That same sense of community, Sanchez said, is what rallies — like the one planned outside the Supreme Court — are meant to reinforce, even as decisions are made inside the building.
“Rallies, including tomorrow’s, are about people knowing they’re not alone, and hearing from other people who support who they are,” he said. “There is support across the country … I wish that I had had someone my age now that I could have looked to, but I am the role model, but I didn’t have any.”
Looking ahead to the possibility that the court could uphold bans on trans athletes, Sanchez said the immediate challenge will be ensuring that families and communities continue to affirm trans youth amid legal uncertainty.
“Having the endorsement of being supported who you are, it helps you so much,” he said. “You cannot put the issue of rights back into the genie’s bottle once people experience what freedom and welcoming is.”
For Sanchez, whose life has spanned decades of change in both sports and government, the cases before the Supreme Court represent a pivotal moment — not just legally, but culturally.
“Living your life, for me, does not require bravery,” he said. “It’s just taking one step and then another.”
Grenell: ‘Real hope’ for gay rights in Iran as result of nationwide protests
Rollback of health IT standards will harm LGBTQ patients
Mark Levine loses race to succeed Adam Ebbin in ‘firehouse’ Democratic primary
National LGBTQ Task Force brings Creating Change conference back to D.C.
Van Hollen speaks at ‘ICE Out for Good’ protest in D.C.
PHOTOS: ‘ICE Out For Good’
A Shakespearean tragedy comes to life in exquisite ‘Hamnet’
Feminist fiction fans will love ‘Bog Queen’
Ford’s ‘First Look’ festival showcases three new productions
