Connect with us

News

DOJ faces renewed call to provide benefits to gay veterans

Udall leads seven senators in requesting action from Obama administration

Published

on

Mark Udall, Democratic Party, United States Senate, Colorado, gay news, Washington Bladea
Mark Udall, Democratic Party, United States Senate, Colorado, gay news, Washington Blade

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is renewing his call for the Obama administration to stop enforcing portions of Title 38 (Photo public domain).

Pressure is increasing on the Obama administration to ensure gay veterans have access to spousal benefits everywhere they go in the country as additional U.S. senators are joining others in a call for action.

In a letter dated Jan. 16 to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, seven senators — led by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) — call on the Obama administration to stop enforcing 103(c) of Title 38 to ensure gay veterans in same-sex marriages can receive spousal benefits.

“We believe taking this action is an important part of DOJ’s responsibility to implement and enforce the legal doctrine created in Windsor,” the senators writes. “Further, if the VA is able to apply 103(c) so that all marriages legally entered into will be recognized, it will provide continuity with the Department of Defense policy that applies to active duty service members and avoid a situation where the federal government is recognizing a person’s marriage one day and ignoring it the next.”

Joining Udall is signing the letter are Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Colo.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) as well as lesbian Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.).

A portion of the law governing veterans’ benefits, 103(c) of Title 38, looks to the state of residence, not the state of celebration, in determining whether a couple is married. That means if a gay couple in which one partner is a veteran weds in a marriage-equality state like New York, but moves to non-marriage equality state like Colorado, the couple won’t be able to apply for these benefits.

The letter emphasizes that the place of residence rule for spousal benefits isn’t a hypothetical problem for gay couples because many have already been denied benefits under this statute. Some of the spousal benefits allocated under Title 38 are disability benefits, survivor benefits and joint burial at a veteran’s cemetery.

“Over the last few months, there have been specific instances of legally married couples who were denied VA spousal benefits solely because of their gender and place of residence,” the letter states.

The Obama administration has already taken some action on this issue. In the wake of the Supreme Court decision against DOMA, the Justice Department had announced in September the Obama administration wouldn’t enforce a portion of Title 38 that independently defines marriage in opposite-sex terms.

But no decision has been made on the place of residence rule of Title 38. The Obama administration has said it’s still reviewing whether it can stop enforcing 103(c) of the statute.

In the letter, the senators are critical about the length of time it’s taking to resolve this issue in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision against DOMA in June.

“Unfortunately, nearly six months after that decision we continue to see specific cases where the federal government is withholding federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples,” the letter states. “This appears to be in conflict with the central principle of the Windsor decision, that the federal government should respect the lawful marriages of same-sex couples.”

Dena Iverson, a Justice Department, said in response to the missive, “We’re reviewing the letter.”

The continued enforcement of this 103(c) of Title 38 to deny benefits to gay couples has concerned lawmakers for some time.

In November, Udall wrote a letter on his own to the Justice Department calling on the Obama administration to stop enforcing the place of residence rule to discriminate against gay veterans. Earlier this month, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) wrote a similar letter asking the Obama administration to cease enforcement, citing issues that gay veterans are having with obtaining VA loans.

LGBT groups, including the Human Rights Campaign and American Military Partners Association, have said they share the concerns about the place of residence rule under Title 38. HRC has previously called for clarity from the administration on whether or not it can cease enforcing that section of the law to discriminate against gay couples.

Stephen Peters, AMPA president, reiterated his previous call for the Obama administration to take action in a statement.

“No veteran should be treated differently by the federal government just because he or she is married to someone of the same-gender or lives in a state that does not value the diversity of his or her family,” Peters said.

Alex Nicholson, who’s gay and legislative director of Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America, said his organization “absolutely” shares the concerns expressed in the letter.

“IAVA strongly believes that all veterans are entitled to fair and equal treatment with respect to benefits and services provided by the VA,” Nicholson said. “The Supreme Court has been clear that legally married same-sex couples are entitled to federal recognition and benefits, so the administration must proactively resolve the lingering technicalities that have thus far prevented the VA from complying.”

It remains to be seen whether Holder will address this issue — as well as other post-DOMA issues, such as granting Social Security survivor and pension benefits to married same-sex couples in non-marriage equality states — in any of his upcoming public appearances. He’s set to deliver testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 29 and is scheduled as the keynote speaker at HRC’s Greater New York Gala on Feb. 8.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article was incorrect about the date on which Holder would deliver testimony before the Senate. The Blade regrets the error.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Trump threatens Rosie O’Donnell’s citizenship

Comedian responds with post linking him to Epstein

Published

on

Rosie O'Donnell (Screen capture via The Late Late Show/YouTube)

Donald Trump threatened to revoke Rosie O’Donnell’s U.S. citizenship last weekend amid his administration’s pattern of targeting people with whom he has publicly disagreed.

The actress and comedian, known for her roles in major motion pictures like “A League of Their Own” and “Harriet the Spy,” was singled out by the president on his social media app Truth Social, where he called the lesbian entertainer a “Threat to Humanity.”

“Because of the fact that Rosie O’Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship,” Trump also posted. “[She] should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

In response to the post—which reignites a decade-old feud between the two—O’Donnell shared a collage of photos from her time in Ireland, along with an old photo of Trump with convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

“The president of the usa has always hated the fact that i see him for who he is – a criminal con man sexual abusing liar out to harm our nation to serve himself,” the former talk show host posted on Instagram. She continued, “this is why i moved to ireland – he is a dangerous old soulless man with dementia who lacks empathy compassion and basic humanity – i stand in direct opposition [to] all he represents – so do millions of others – u gonna deport all who stand against ur evil tendencies – ur a bad joke who cant form a coherent sentence.”

Trump’s threat is both irregular and constitutionally unsound. The Supreme Court has ruled over multiple decades that stripping someone of their citizenship violates the Constitution—and the 14th Amendment.

Three Supreme Court cases in particular—Trop v. Dulles (1958), Afroyim v. Rusk (1967), and Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)—have all affirmed that once legally obtained, citizenship is not something that can simply be revoked, even if the president disagrees with what a person says or does. In Afroyim v. Rusk, the Supreme Court wrote: “In our country the people are sovereign and the Government cannot sever its relationship to the people by taking away their citizenship.”

This authoritarian threat echoes Trump’s broader efforts to undermine birthright citizenship, which has been a foundational part of the U.S. Constitution since the ratification of the 14th amendment.

Continue Reading

Bolivia

Trans Bolivian Senate candidate hopes to make history

Luna Humérez running to represent La Paz Province

Published

on

Luna Humérez (Courtesy photo)

Luna Humérez has made history in Bolivia as the first transgender woman to run for a seat in the country’s Senate.

“We are making history, my candidacy is a bet on human rights,” Humérez told the Washington Blade.

She hopes to represent La Paz Province under the banner of SÚMATE, a center-left political movement that includes presidential candidate Manfred Reyes Villa. 

“It is important to occupy these spaces and demonstrate that beyond our identity we have the capacity,” said Humérez.

With a trajectory of more than 15 years as an activist for trans rights in Bolivia, Humérez is not a new figure in the public arena. A lawyer by profession and president of the Organization of Transvestites, Transgender and Transsexual Women of Bolivia known by the acronym OTRAF, she has been one of the main promoters of a trans rights law in the country. Humérez is also the first trans woman in Bolivia to enter into a civil marriage after authorities legally recognized her gender identity.

Humérez is the founder of Casa Trans Pamela Valenzuela, a refuge and community center in La Paz.

Aware of the need to advance protections for sexual and gender diversities, Humérez has proposed a legislative platform that focuses on the control and effective enforcement of laws.

“Bolivia is full of laws, regulations that are obsolete, however they have a mandatory compliance,” she said, noting reforms should improve accessibility and respond to marginalized groups’ specific needs.

Humérez’s platform is “full rights for all, regardless of their sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Facing a campaign from a historically marginalized identity, Humérez recognizes the resistance, but also celebrates the support. 

“My candidacy also speaks of the fact that there is a large number of Bolivians who have been left behind because of discriminatory bias,” she told the Blade. “I have so many anecdotes, which began with those who trusted me, among them are my sisters in struggle, human rights activists, political activists, animal activists, environmentalists, and others with whom we formed ties, mostly young people who also have the desire to take flight and change the country for the better. They are my other family and I am very grateful to them.”

Humérez proposes, in addition to a gender rights and diversity agenda, a platform with seven focuses — legal, political, economic, productive, social, moral, and territorial — and five immediate actions. These include:

  • An “immediate injection” of $10 billion to stabilize the economy and create the flow of dollars
  • Reestablish order throughout the country; guaranteeing freedom of protest without interfering in economic development
  • Create one million “decent and well-paid jobs” that would allow “talented young people” to remain in the country
  • “Act firmly” against corruption
  • “Promote real authority for each department” that would decentralize the government

Regarding LGBTQ youth in Bolivia, the lawyer and activist envisions a future where “the freedom that every human being has to choose their sexual orientation and gender identity with equal opportunities must be guaranteed.” 

“I notice that the youth today understood this, and now it is necessary to have spaces of accessibility and participation without any consideration,” said Humérez. “The State must guarantee through its instances this accessibility. We need a Bolivia that is more plural, inclusive and in brotherhood.”

Humérez concluded the interview by noting her family’s humble beginnings.

“I know what deprivation is and I know what it is like not to have enough bread to put in one’s mouth,” she said. “If my life has been to help as many people as possible, being in there I will be able to help much more. I am an example of overcoming and showing that anything is possible. Do not judge me by my identity, but by my capacity.”

The country’s general elections will take place on Aug. 17. 

Continue Reading

National

Trump administration sues California over trans student-athletes

Lawsuit claims state policy violates federal law on school sports

Published

on

Attorney General Pam Bondi and Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Screen capture via The Justice Department/YouTube)

President Donald Trump is making good on his threat to punish California officials for allowing transgender female student-athletes to compete with cisgender girls in school sports. 

On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Justice announced it is suing the state’s Department of Education, claiming California’s policy to allow trans students to compete with other girls violates Title IX, the federal law that bans discrimination in education based on sex. The DOJ’s suit says California’s rules “are not only illegal and unfair but also demeaning, signaling to girls that their opportunities and achievements are secondary to accommodating boys.”

As the Washington Blade reported in June, this lawsuit follows a warning by the Trump administration to end the trans participation policy within 10 days or face referral to the DOJ as well as the loss of federal education funding.

And California may merely be the first to face legal action, according to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who warned that the 21 other states which permit trans girls to compete in female athletics could also face challenges by the federal government.

“If you do not comply, you’re next,” she said in a video posted on the DOJ website. “We will protect girls in girls sports.” Bondi was joined by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. 

The DOJ suit named California’s Education Department and the California Interscholastic Federation, the governing body for high school sports. A spokesperson for the CIF told the Associated Press the organization would not comment on pending litigation.

A spokesperson for Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom deferred to the CIF and the Department of Education in declining to comment on the lawsuit since the governor was not named a defendant. But Newsom’s office told the AP that the Trump administration’s attacks on its policies protecting transgender athletes are “a cynical attempt” to distract from the federal government’s withholding of funds for all students who benefit from after-school and summer programs.

Newsom, however, has come under criticism — most notably by the Human Rights Campaign — for remarks he made in March, that allowing transgender athletes to compete in women’s sports was “deeply unfair,” as the Blade reported. 

For more than a decade, California law has allowed students to participate in sex-segregated school programs, including on sports teams, and use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity.

But headlines about AB Hernandez, an out trans female high school student-athlete who won titles in the California track-and-field championships last month, drew condemnations from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, and President Trump himself. 

Following the meet, Dhillon wrote in a letter to the California Interscholastic Federation that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution by allowing trans girls to compete against other female athletes.

As for the lawsuit, DOJ claims California’s policies “ignore undeniable biological differences between boys and girls, in favor of an amorphous ’gender identity.’”

“The results of these illegal policies are stark: girls are displaced from podiums, denied awards, and miss out on critical visibility for college scholarships and recognition,” the suit says.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases challenging state bans on trans student-athletes, as the Blade reported. More than 20 states have limited trans girls from participating on girls sports teams, barred gender-affirming surgeries for minors and required parents to be notified if a child changes their pronouns at school. More than two dozen states have laws barring trans women and girls from participating in certain sports competitions. Challenges to some of those policies are still being decided by courts across the country. 

Back in February, the president signed an executive order that bans trans girls and women from participating in sports that match their gender identity, as the Blade reported.

Supporters of banning trans girls and women from competing include the conservative California Family Council, which has posted a petition online, arguing a ban would restore fairness in athletic competitions. Opponents like Equality California say bans are an attack on transgender youth.

“Local schools and athletic associations are the ones who should be handling these issues, and they are already creating policies that protect transgender youth and ensure a level playing field for all students. A federal ban that overrides those rules could require young girls to answer inappropriate personal questions or even be subjected to genital inspections by strangers if they want to participate in sports,” the organization said in a statement in February.

“The head of the NCAA, himself a former Republican Governor, recently told a U.S. Senate panel that he knew of less than 10 out transgender athletes among the 510,000 currently competing in college sports—less than .002 percent of all NCAA athletes.

“Studies confirm that participation in sports provides kids with invaluable life skills such as teamwork, leadership, discipline, and cooperation—fundamental lessons that every young person deserves the chance to experience. Beyond the field, sports also contribute significantly to students’ overall well-being, fostering better mental health, boosting academic performance, and enhancing self-esteem and confidence.”

Continue Reading

Popular