Connect with us

homepage news

Bowser: ‘What’s important is what’s next’

Democratic mayoral candidate says her support for LGBT community is strong

Published

on

Muriel Bowser, gay news, Washington Blade
Muriel Bowser, gay news, Washington Blade

Mayoral candidate Muriel Bowser said work remains in fighting hate crimes and supporting the trans community. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Editor’s note: This is the third and final installment in a series profiling the leading D.C. mayoral candidates. The Blade has interviewed both Carol Schwartz and David Catania previously.

D.C. Council member and mayoral candidate Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4) had an emphatic and detailed response to the question of why LGBT residents should vote for her over her two main opponents.

Mayoral rivals David Catania, an at-large Council member since 1997, and former at-large Council member Carol Schwartz, who served on the Council for 16 years, have a longer record on LGBT issues than Bowser by way of their longer tenure on the Council. Both are running as independents.

Bowser, who leads Catania and Schwartz in the latest polls, first won election to the Council in 2007.

“I’ve been as you know well regarded across the city for supporting the LGBT community and have done so from a leadership position from my Council seat,” Bowser told the Blade in an Oct. 17 interview.

“I was very proud to cast a vote in support of marriage equality and make sure that we’re opening up all of our institutions for people in the LGBT community.”

Bowser added, “What’s important now is what’s next to do. And that’s a lot.”

Using the mayor’s office as a platform for drawing attention to hate crimes targeting the LGBT community and their root causes, making sure LGBT people, especially LGBT seniors, are included in the city’s affordable housing programs, and strengthening the city’s job training program for transgender residents initiated by Mayor Vincent Gray are just some of the LGBT issues she will pursue if elected mayor, Bowser said.

LGBT activists following the mayor’s race say the LGBT community appears divided between Bowser and Catania, who, if elected, would become the city’s first out gay mayor. Activists say Schwartz, a longtime popular figure in the LGBT community, has a smaller but highly committed corps of supporters in the LGBT community.

Many LGBT Democrats, including Paul Kuntzler, co-founder of the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest LGBT political group, are supporting Catania, saying they believe he’s the best candidate on both LGBT and non-LGBT issues.

But Bowser points to her strong support among LGBT residents in all sections of the city. She is often accompanied at LGBT campaign events by her openly gay brother, Marvin Bowser, who serves as her campaign’s LGBT community liaison.

An LGBT campaign rally for Bowser Tuesday night at Hank’s Oyster Bar next to 17th Street, N.W., before the start of the annual Halloween High Heel Race on 17th Street, drew more than 200 people. Bowser was besieged by well-wishers when she waded into a crowd of mostly LGBT people waiting for the race to begin.

Catania and Schwartz also showed up for the high heel race festivities. People carrying Bowser and Catania signs could be seen up and down the street.

“As I see it I’m very proud of the broad base of support that I have in the LGBT community across all kinds of race and income and geographic areas,” she said. “I was never more proud — maybe a month ago we had a huge LGBT meet and greet and the diversity is what made me so proud. People were from every ward — gay, lesbian, transgender — all to support the agenda that remains.”

Bowser was also quick to challenge an allegation by Catania that her record on HIV/AIDS is non-existent. Catania told the Blade in an interview in early October that he cannot recall her ever mentioning HIV/AIDS during her seven years on the Council.

“That’s not a fair assessment at all,” she said. “But I know what is an absurd statement is that one person can claim to have driven down AIDS in the District of Columbia.”

Bowser was referring to Catania’s campaign statements that during his tenure as chair of the Council’s Committee on Health, in which he prodded city officials to strengthen the city’s AIDS office, the number of AIDS deaths in the city dropped by 69 percent and the number of new HIV infections dropped by 50 percent.

“So the idea, first of all, that a lot of people reject at the Whitman-Walker Clinic or in previous administrations – the executives who really put the money and the people in place to get prevention programs and treatment programs and testing programs in place – they have to have a big quarrel with the assertion that one legislator drove down the incidents of HIV in the District of Columbia,” Bowser said. “That’s just not true.”

Possibly for the first time during the campaign Bowser responded to rumors that have circulated in anonymous postings on Twitter and readers’ comments on the Blade’s website that she might be a lesbian.

“Well I’m not,” she said.

When asked about the social media postings where the rumors have surfaced, Bowser said, “They post a lot of wacky things. I think you know that. But as I said I’m very proud to have the support of a lot of people in the LGBT community who are posting on your newspaper as well.”

She added, “And they’re posting on things that matter – that I’m focused on how we build on the democratic values in this city and represent the large swath of Washingtonians who want to invest in our schools all across the city, who want to build a strong and growing middle class in the city, and who want to make sure that we’re attracting the talent in our government that’s going to allow us to get ready for the city’s growth over the next 25 years. And so that’s what our focus is.”

 

Muriel Bowser, gay news, Washington Blade

Mayoral candidate Muriel Bowser greeted revelers at the 2014 High Heel Race on Oct. 28. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Washington Blade: Can you tell a little about your background growing up in D.C., what you did before getting elected to the Council, and how that might have prepared you for running for mayor?

Muriel Bowser: Oh, absolutely. I would love to. I think that my experience is directly related not only to how we’ve been able to bring the city back in so many ways but it directly relates to the challenges ahead. I have the wonderful experience of being born and raised here in the District of Columbia. And in my formative years especially we were a very different city, a city that was dangerous, a city whose schools were spiraling out of control. The school issues were spiraling out of control and the Congress took us over.

And so I have that context to know that the government and the community have to work together to make sure we never go back to those days. I’ve been trained in public policy, which is my passion. And I worked 10 years in local government before being elected to the Council — most recently in Montgomery County where I worked in downtown Silver Spring on transportation, downtown development in keeping the community engaged in all of those issues.

I was elected in 2007 to represent Ward 4. And quite frankly I think the experience as a ward Council member is the best experience to be mayor of the District of Columbia. As a ward Council member you have the responsibility to lead a discreet group of people and be held accountable by them. And that’s what we’ve been able to do. We moved an agenda focused on expanding quality school options, investing in our under invested corridors and also making sure we’re holding government agencies accountable.

So as such I have to know all of the directors, all of their budgets and how they’re working or not working. And that has given me the experience to lead the city.

 

Blade: Were you an ANC commissioner?

Bowser: I was an ANC commissioner. When I moved in my home I was lucky enough, smart enough I guess even at the time to buy a home in a neighborhood that I thought was a good neighborhood. It could be a great neighborhood. And I got a house for $125,000. I had a few criteria. I wanted three bedrooms, I wanted a finished basement and I wanted to be close to a Metro. And I was able to find that in Riggs Park and I’ve lived there ever since – for the last 14 years.

But I come from a tradition of ANCs. My father was elected in the first ANC class and I thought it would be the best way for me to serve my community as well. I was elected twice to be an ANC commissioner.

 

Blade: You and your two main opponents have each said that you strongly support LGBT equality and LGBT rights and you have a record on some of those issues. What would you say to an LGBT resident about why they should vote for you and not the other two?

Bowser: Well I’ve been as you know well regarded across the city for supporting the LGBT community and have done so from a leadership position from my Council seat. I was very proud to cast a vote in support of marriage equality and make sure that we’re opening up all of our institutions for people in the LGBT community.

What’s also important now is what’s next. A lot of people have worked long and hard to get us to this point. And I want to especially acknowledge the GLAA [Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance] and the Stein Democrats who really made sure that we had marriage equality in this city. And you know how — because they made it a prerequisite to get elected, to have people who were fairness based and would move and advance the ball in the District of Columbia.

But now we have to look at what’s next to do. And there’s a lot. As I see it I’m very proud of the broad base of support that I have in the LGBT community across all kinds of race and income and geographic areas. People in the LGBT community come out and support me in great numbers. I was never more proud maybe a month ago we had a huge LGBT meet and greet and the diversity is what made me so proud. People were from every ward – gay, lesbian, transgender – all to support the agenda that remains.

What we hear most is – I’ll start with how we make sure people are safe. We have to end hate crimes in the District of Columbia. It’s too much. We have to have a strong partnership with MPD so our officers are trained and know how to deal and respond to hate crimes. But more than that, the mayor of the District of Columbia has to use the perch that she has to tell people that hate and violence are not going to be acceptable in our city. And I’ve stood up and done that when people in our community have been harmed.

We also hear about housing issues and how important it is to get rid of discrimination for LGBT people in all manner of housing. I was proud to include in this budget funding to examine how other cities approached LGBT senior issues, for example, in housing. Those are important questions to consider. In our public housing, how are we approaching LGBT issues? So I think that’s kind of an untapped area that this government has to get in that space. By next year, 20 percent of our population will be over the age of 65. And that of course includes our LGBT community.

I think you heard when we were at Mary’s House – the groundbreaking for Mary’s House – when Dr. Woody said we don’t disappear at age 65. And I think for too long our housing strategies were not taking into account all of our community. Jobs are another area where we have to focus on. I was honored to host a tea at my home for the transgender community and their sole focus was on jobs. And what I heard loud and clear was that people thought that the Gray administration had done a lot in advancing the discussion and beginning the implementation of meaningful jobs programs. So I don’t think we need to start all over. And I want to build on some of those initiatives.

I know there was a focus on Project Empowerment. How can we build on that to make sure that people in the transgender community are being hired? I was really struck by what seems like on its face to be discrimination against the transgender community in employment practices. We have to make sure our own government is not doing that. As I understood it we could only account for transgender people who were working in D.C. government. Now there may be others, but I want to make sure that the D.C. government is a welcoming place. And so you’ll hear me talk about jobs a lot and how we can refocus the up to $100 million that is spent every year in job training – a hundred million dollars that doesn’t necessarily equate to jobs.

So I have a big focus on how to close the jobs and opportunity gaps in our community. We know that they exist in great numbers in the Ward 7 and 8 communities. And we know that they exist in great numbers in our returning citizens’ community. And we know that they exist in great numbers in our transgender community. So how can we refocus our efforts to help populations that really need it?

 

Blade: You mentioned how the problem of hate crimes is an ongoing issue. Most LGBT advocates have said relations between the LGBT community and the police department has improved significantly in recent years. But a recent report on LGBT-police relations prepared by an independent task force initiated by Chief Cathy Lanier found that the department’s Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit appeared to become less effective than it was under the previous chief, Charles Ramsey. Is that something you might look into and have you made a decision yet on whether to retain the chief?

Bowser: Well I have great confidence in Cathy Lanier. And I think that she has really helped to make sure we have a high quality force of officers who want to do the right thing. And when she’s found officers that were not doing the right thing she has acted speedily to make sure they’re not in a position to disgrace their badge or to harm the department. So I have great confidence in her.

And issues with the specialized units, including the GLLU, when it came up – I’m trying to think what year that was. It must be 2008 or 2009 when I had some very direct conversations with her about why she thought this was the best way to use her resources. And she’s been policing in the District of Columbia for a long time. She believes in equality and fairness and she believes in protecting all of our residents. But she also has to be held accountable. So we want to follow all these crimes. But she believes that the deployment of resources actually is making officers who are trained and sensitized to all of these issues in the gay and lesbian and the transgender community available all across the city.

I think that we’ve kind of gotten away from this notion that gay people only live in one place, right?

 

Blade: Yes.

Bowser: And so we need a whole force that needs to be able to address issues in the LGBT community and they need to be responsive all across the city. The same is true — we used to think that Latinos in our city only lived in Ward 1. And we know that’s not true. So we have to have a force where it shouldn’t be the expectation that only a few officers know what they’re doing when dealing with issues in the gay and lesbian community. All of the officers should. So I want that to be my focus.

But what I’ve heard loud and clear is that there’s a model that worked under Ramsey and there’s kind of the adage if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. But I think that what the chief found is that she could have a broader coverage all across the city if she deployed resources differently.

 

Blade: In the area of hate crimes, there is a consensus that the police respond quickly and do all they can to investigate those crimes but most agree that the police can’t prevent someone from committing a hate crime. Some in the LGBT community say they are worried just walking the streets.

Bowser: That makes me sad.

 

Blade: Is there anything the mayor can do to get at the underlying causes of hate crimes? Arrest records show that many hate crimes targeting the LGBT community are committed by young people.

Bowser: Yes. The one benefit of office is having a bully pulpit and leading by example and speaking out when things are wrong. Another advantage that the mayor has is that we can have partnerships with other leaders in the community that have a voice in people’s lives like our faith community and our non-profit community. And having real candid conversations with them about treating people fairly, ending the violence, and having a city that is safe for everyone can make a difference.

 

Blade:  One thing that Councilman Catania said in his interview with the Blade earlier this month was that he cannot recall you ever mentioning the word HIV/AIDS – even once. I noticed AIDS-related issues are mentioned in your campaign platform booklet. But is that a fair assessment?

Bowser: Certainly not – certainly not. That’s not a fair assessment at all.

 

Blade: Do you think he was referring to Council meetings?

Bowser: You will have to ask him. But I know what is an absurd statement is — that one person can claim to have driven down AIDS in the District of Columbia. We know the seriously bad impacts that AIDS had on our community across a lot of our population. And it’s still having a bad effect for people who look like me – women in my age group. Where we haven’t seen a lot of attention is talking to women in my age group who are contracting AIDS and who are not getting tested and who may not be aware of all the dangerous situations that they’re putting themselves in.

So the idea, first of all, that a lot of people reject at the Whitman-Walker Clinic or in previous administrations the executives who really put the money and the people in place to get prevention programs and treatment programs and testing programs in place – they have to have a big quarrel with the assertion that one legislator drove down the incidents of HIV in the District of Columbia. That’s just not true.

We should also not congratulate ourselves too much because still too many people are getting infected. Still too many young people are involved in behaviors that will get them infected. There are still too many women who are involved. We have so many other issues in our health care community as well. And people in the LGBT community making sure they have access to quality care that they’re not being discriminated against in that setting either and that there are welcoming environments.

I strongly support removing the stigma around HIV. We know that people can live with HIV. And again I think that the mayor can play a role in helping to remove that stigma, especially in the African-American community where people are less likely to talk about it, get tested and get treated.

 

Blade: The Council’s Judiciary and Public Safety Committee, of which you are a member, voted unanimously on Oct. 15 to pass the Human Rights Amendment Act of 2014. The bill calls for repealing a clause that Congress added to the D.C. Human Rights Act back in 1989 that allows religious educational institutions in the city to discriminate based on sexual orientation. Assuming the full Council passes this bill, as expected, do you think this could prompt Congress to try to step in again?

Bowser: Well there’s always the concern of Congress stepping in. That’s why it’s so important that we forge a new path to get autonomy – legislative autonomy, budget autonomy and a new path toward statehood. We have to always be concerned about the Congress stepping in. There are all kinds of riders that can be attached to our legislation and appropriations bills. And that has to change. We’ve seen it with reproductive health issues. And I think we should be concerned about seeing it again.

But that doesn’t stop us from doing the right thing. And we have a human rights law in the District of Columbia that we all should be proud of. We should look to every instance that we have to make it stronger. And so I will be voting for it.

 

Blade: Concerning the transgender community, would you support and continue a program started by Mayor Gray and operated by the D.C. Office of Human Rights that seeks to curtail hate crimes and discrimination against transgender people through public service announcements?

Bowser: The more public education the better. I tend to think – and I get this question a lot. In my experience in bringing communities together who are very diverse is that people tend to — if we take down these barriers — not to say let’s all get together to figure out how to end hate crimes, because mostly you will attract the people who are activists in that area, when, in fact, we need to have that message in everything that the city does. And so the city needs to be at festivals and parades where people are coming together for a whole other reason entirely to say that this government is diverse and we support all of our residents. So that’s important.

How can we have that message delivered at schools? How can we have that message delivered in the faith community? So I think it’s best – yes – to have public service, to have ad campaigns. But to also make sure that message is ever-present in everything we do when people are coming together for nothing to do with violence but everything to do with community.

 

Blade: A number of messages the Blade has received from readers through Twitter postings and email links have questioned your sexual orientation. They often mention that you are single and perhaps all single people, men or women, receive these comments. Would you like to comment on that?

Bowser: Oh, I’ve commented on it extensively.

 

Blade: Do you mean for you or the subject in general?

Bowser: What do you mean?

 

Blade: Well what they appear to be implying is that you may be gay.

Bowser: Well I’m not.

 

Blade: Most people would likely say who cares? But we don’t know if someone is putting people up to do this. But the messages keep coming up – sometimes as postings by readers as comments on our stories online.

Bowser: They post a lot of wacky things. I think you know that. But as I said I’m very proud to have the support of a lot of people in the LGBT community who are posting on your newspaper as well. And they’re posting on the things that matter – that I’m focused on how we build on the democratic values in this city and represent the large swath of Washingtonians who want to invest in our schools all across the city, who want to build a strong and growing middle class in the city, and want to make sure that we’re attracting the talent in our government that’s going to allow us to get ready for the city’s growth over the next 25 years.

And so that’s what our focus is. I’ve put together a wonderful committee of LGBT leaders, activists and have been a Council member who has made sure I have a gay-friendly office that people from all over feel very comfortable talking to us, bringing their issues to us, and being responsive to their needs. And that’s exactly the kind of mayor I will be.

 

Blade: One of the issues the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance has raised in an election year position paper is that the legal standing for protesting a proposed liquor license for bars, restaurants and nightclubs should be removed from ad hoc groups of five or more citizens and left solely with Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, which are elected by the residents. GLAA and others have said that the so-called ‘gangs of five’ have unduly blocked or delayed a liquor license application for months and sometimes as long as a year, causing an unfair burden on small businesses seeking to open a restaurant or bar. Is that something you would consider supporting?

Bowser: Well ultimately, of course the [Alcoholic Beverage Control] Board decides. And I have a neighborhood focus and have been an ANC commissioner. I do think and believe the ANC should be afforded great weight. And I’ve participated long and hard in that process with [D.C. Council member] Jim Graham on the reforms [liquor licensing reform legislation]. And I actually think we landed in the right place.

And I think the update has addressed – kind of streamlining the response times. But I think citizen input is important and that we have responsible business owners who have a liquor license. We have decided that having a liquor license requires an extra layer of scrutiny in this city. And I think we probably landed in the right place. We have I think about a year – a year and a half experience with it. And I want to watch it to make sure that the instances that you described, that the process isn’t being unreasonably hijacked. That’s not fair to the business community.

But we also have to say that, one, we can’t rely on one instance to determine what the law should be for everybody. So I can definitely, absolutely commit to looking at the experience with the changes that we recently made to the procedure – to see how they’re working and to see if they need to be tweaked.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

homepage news

Honoring the legacy of New Orleans’ 1973 UpStairs Lounge fire

Why the arson attack that killed 32 gay men still resonates 50 years later

Published

on

Fifty years ago this week, 32 gay men were killed in an arson attack on the UpStairs Lounge in New Orleans. (Photo by G.E. Arnold/Times-Picayune; reprinted with permission)

On June 23 of last year, I held the microphone as a gay man in the New Orleans City Council Chamber and related a lost piece of queer history to the seven council members. I told this story to disabuse all New Orleanians of the notion that silence and accommodation, in the face of institutional and official failures, are a path to healing.  

The story I related to them began on a typical Sunday night at a second-story bar on the fringe of New Orleans’ French Quarter in 1973, where working-class men would gather around a white baby grand piano and belt out the lyrics to a song that was the anthem of their hidden community, “United We Stand” by the Brotherhood of Man. 

“United we stand,” the men would sing together, “divided we fall” — the words epitomizing the ethos of their beloved UpStairs Lounge bar, an egalitarian free space that served as a forerunner to today’s queer safe havens. 

Around that piano in the 1970s Deep South, gays and lesbians, white and Black queens, Christians and non-Christians, and even early gender minorities could cast aside the racism, sexism, and homophobia of the times to find acceptance and companionship for a moment. 

For regulars, the UpStairs Lounge was a miracle, a small pocket of acceptance in a broader world where their very identities were illegal. 

On the Sunday night of June 24, 1973, their voices were silenced in a murderous act of arson that claimed 32 lives and still stands as the deadliest fire in New Orleans history — and the worst mass killing of gays in 20th century America. 

As 13 fire companies struggled to douse the inferno, police refused to question the chief suspect, even though gay witnesses identified and brought the soot-covered man to officers idly standing by. This suspect, an internally conflicted gay-for-pay sex worker named Rodger Dale Nunez, had been ejected from the UpStairs Lounge screaming the word “burn” minutes before, but New Orleans police rebuffed the testimony of fire survivors on the street and allowed Nunez to disappear.

As the fire raged, police denigrated the deceased to reporters on the street: “Some thieves hung out there, and you know this was a queer bar.” 

For days afterward, the carnage met with official silence. With no local gay political leaders willing to step forward, national Gay Liberation-era figures like Rev. Troy Perry of the Metropolitan Community Church flew in to “help our bereaved brothers and sisters” — and shatter officialdom’s code of silence. 

Perry broke local taboos by holding a press conference as an openly gay man. “It’s high time that you people, in New Orleans, Louisiana, got the message and joined the rest of the Union,” Perry said. 

Two days later, on June 26, 1973, as families hesitated to step forward to identify their kin in the morgue, UpStairs Lounge owner Phil Esteve stood in his badly charred bar, the air still foul with death. He rebuffed attempts by Perry to turn the fire into a call for visibility and progress for homosexuals. 

“This fire had very little to do with the gay movement or with anything gay,” Esteve told a reporter from The Philadelphia Inquirer. “I do not want my bar or this tragedy to be used to further any of their causes.” 

Conspicuously, no photos of Esteve appeared in coverage of the UpStairs Lounge fire or its aftermath — and the bar owner also remained silent as he witnessed police looting the ashes of his business. 

“Phil said the cash register, juke box, cigarette machine and some wallets had money removed,” recounted Esteve’s friend Bob McAnear, a former U.S. Customs officer. “Phil wouldn’t report it because, if he did, police would never allow him to operate a bar in New Orleans again.” 

The next day, gay bar owners, incensed at declining gay bar traffic amid an atmosphere of anxiety, confronted Perry at a clandestine meeting. “How dare you hold your damn news conferences!” one business owner shouted. 

Ignoring calls for gay self-censorship, Perry held a 250-person memorial for the fire victims the following Sunday, July 1, culminating in mourners defiantly marching out the front door of a French Quarter church into waiting news cameras. “Reverend Troy Perry awoke several sleeping giants, me being one of them,” recalled Charlene Schneider, a lesbian activist who walked out of that front door with Perry.

(Photo by G.E. Arnold/Times-Picayune; reprinted with permission)

Esteve doubted the UpStairs Lounge story’s capacity to rouse gay political fervor. As the coroner buried four of his former patrons anonymously on the edge of town, Esteve quietly collected at least $25,000 in fire insurance proceeds. Less than a year later, he used the money to open another gay bar called the Post Office, where patrons of the UpStairs Lounge — some with visible burn scars — gathered but were discouraged from singing “United We Stand.” 

New Orleans cops neglected to question the chief arson suspect and closed the investigation without answers in late August 1973. Gay elites in the city’s power structure began gaslighting the mourners who marched with Perry into the news cameras, casting suspicion on their memories and re-characterizing their moment of liberation as a stunt. 

When a local gay journalist asked in April 1977, “Where are the gay activists in New Orleans?,” Esteve responded that there were none, because none were needed. “We don’t feel we’re discriminated against,” Esteve said. “New Orleans gays are different from gays anywhere else… Perhaps there is some correlation between the amount of gay activism in other cities and the degree of police harassment.” 

(Photo by H.J. Patterson/Times-Picayune; reprinted with permission)

An attitude of nihilism and disavowal descended upon the memory of the UpStairs Lounge victims, goaded by Esteve and fellow gay entrepreneurs who earned their keep via gay patrons drowning their sorrows each night instead of protesting the injustices that kept them drinking. 

Into the 1980s, the story of the UpStairs Lounge all but vanished from conversation — with the exception of a few sanctuaries for gay political debate such as the local lesbian bar Charlene’s, run by the activist Charlene Schneider. 

By 1988, the 15th anniversary of the fire, the UpStairs Lounge narrative comprised little more than a call for better fire codes and indoor sprinklers. UpStairs Lounge survivor Stewart Butler summed it up: “A tragedy that, as far as I know, no good came of.” 

Finally, in 1991, at Stewart Butler and Charlene Schneider’s nudging, the UpStairs Lounge story became aligned with the crusade of liberated gays and lesbians seeking equal rights in Louisiana. The halls of power responded with intermittent progress. The New Orleans City Council, horrified by the story but not yet ready to take its look in the mirror, enacted an anti-discrimination ordinance protecting gays and lesbians in housing, employment, and public accommodations that Dec. 12 — more than 18 years after the fire. 

“I believe the fire was the catalyst for the anger to bring us all to the table,” Schneider told The Times-Picayune, a tacit rebuke to Esteve’s strategy of silent accommodation. Even Esteve seemed to change his stance with time, granting a full interview with the first UpStairs Lounge scholar Johnny Townsend sometime around 1989. 

Most of the figures in this historic tale are now deceased. What’s left is an enduring story that refused to go gently. The story now echoes around the world — a musical about the UpStairs Lounge fire recently played in Tokyo, translating the gay underworld of the 1973 French Quarter for Japanese audiences.

When I finished my presentation to the City Council last June, I looked up to see the seven council members in tears. Unanimously, they approved a resolution acknowledging the historic failures of city leaders in the wake of the UpStairs Lounge fire. 

Council members personally apologized to UpStairs Lounge families and survivors seated in the chamber in a symbolic act that, though it could not bring back those who died, still mattered greatly to those whose pain had been denied, leaving them to grieve alone. At long last, official silence and indifference gave way to heartfelt words of healing. 

The way Americans remember the past is an active, ongoing process. Our collective memory is malleable, but it matters because it speaks volumes about our maturity as a people, how we acknowledge the past’s influence in our lives, and how it shapes the examples we set for our youth. Do we grapple with difficult truths, or do we duck accountability by defaulting to nostalgia and bluster? Or worse, do we simply ignore the past until it fades into a black hole of ignorance and indifference? 

I believe that a factual retelling of the UpStairs Lounge tragedy — and how, 50 years onward, it became known internationally — resonates beyond our current divides. It reminds queer and non-queer Americans that ignoring the past holds back the present, and that silence is no cure for what ails a participatory nation. 

Silence isolates. Silence gaslights and shrouds. It preserves the power structures that scapegoat the disempowered. 

Solidarity, on the other hand, unites. Solidarity illuminates a path forward together. Above all, solidarity transforms the downtrodden into a resounding chorus of citizens — in the spirit of voices who once gathered ‘round a white baby grand piano and sang, joyfully and loudly, “United We Stand.” 

(Photo by Philip Ames/Times-Picayune; reprinted with permission)

Robert W. Fieseler is a New Orleans-based journalist and the author of “Tinderbox: the Untold Story of the Up Stairs Lounge Fire and the Rise of Gay Liberation.”

Continue Reading

homepage news

New Supreme Court term includes critical LGBTQ case with ‘terrifying’ consequences

Business owner seeks to decline services for same-sex weddings

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court is to set consider the case of 303 Creative, which seeks to refuse design services for same-sex weddings. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court, after a decision overturning Roe v. Wade that still leaves many reeling, is starting a new term with justices slated to revisit the issue of LGBTQ rights.

In 303 Creative v. Elenis, the court will return to the issue of whether or not providers of custom-made goods can refuse service to LGBTQ customers on First Amendment grounds. In this case, the business owner is Lorie Smith, a website designer in Colorado who wants to opt out of providing her graphic design services for same-sex weddings despite the civil rights law in her state.

Jennifer Pizer, acting chief legal officer of Lambda Legal, said in an interview with the Blade, “it’s not too much to say an immeasurably huge amount is at stake” for LGBTQ people depending on the outcome of the case.

“This contrived idea that making custom goods, or offering a custom service, somehow tacitly conveys an endorsement of the person — if that were to be accepted, that would be a profound change in the law,” Pizer said. “And the stakes are very high because there are no practical, obvious, principled ways to limit that kind of an exception, and if the law isn’t clear in this regard, then the people who are at risk of experiencing discrimination have no security, no effective protection by having a non-discrimination laws, because at any moment, as one makes their way through the commercial marketplace, you don’t know whether a particular business person is going to refuse to serve you.”

The upcoming arguments and decision in the 303 Creative case mark a return to LGBTQ rights for the Supreme Court, which had no lawsuit to directly address the issue in its previous term, although many argued the Dobbs decision put LGBTQ rights in peril and threatened access to abortion for LGBTQ people.

And yet, the 303 Creative case is similar to other cases the Supreme Court has previously heard on the providers of services seeking the right to deny services based on First Amendment grounds, such as Masterpiece Cakeshop and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. In both of those cases, however, the court issued narrow rulings on the facts of litigation, declining to issue sweeping rulings either upholding non-discrimination principles or First Amendment exemptions.

Pizer, who signed one of the friend-of-the-court briefs in opposition to 303 Creative, said the case is “similar in the goals” of the Masterpiece Cakeshop litigation on the basis they both seek exemptions to the same non-discrimination law that governs their business, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, or CADA, and seek “to further the social and political argument that they should be free to refuse same-sex couples or LGBTQ people in particular.”

“So there’s the legal goal, and it connects to the social and political goals and in that sense, it’s the same as Masterpiece,” Pizer said. “And so there are multiple problems with it again, as a legal matter, but also as a social matter, because as with the religion argument, it flows from the idea that having something to do with us is endorsing us.”

One difference: the Masterpiece Cakeshop litigation stemmed from an act of refusal of service after owner, Jack Phillips, declined to make a custom-made wedding cake for a same-sex couple for their upcoming wedding. No act of discrimination in the past, however, is present in the 303 Creative case. The owner seeks to put on her website a disclaimer she won’t provide services for same-sex weddings, signaling an intent to discriminate against same-sex couples rather than having done so.

As such, expect issues of standing — whether or not either party is personally aggrieved and able bring to a lawsuit — to be hashed out in arguments as well as whether the litigation is ripe for review as justices consider the case. It’s not hard to see U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts, who has sought to lead the court to reach less sweeping decisions (sometimes successfully, and sometimes in the Dobbs case not successfully) to push for a decision along these lines.

Another key difference: The 303 Creative case hinges on the argument of freedom of speech as opposed to the two-fold argument of freedom of speech and freedom of religious exercise in the Masterpiece Cakeshop litigation. Although 303 Creative requested in its petition to the Supreme Court review of both issues of speech and religion, justices elected only to take up the issue of free speech in granting a writ of certiorari (or agreement to take up a case). Justices also declined to accept another question in the petition request of review of the 1990 precedent in Smith v. Employment Division, which concluded states can enforce neutral generally applicable laws on citizens with religious objections without violating the First Amendment.

Representing 303 Creative in the lawsuit is Alliance Defending Freedom, a law firm that has sought to undermine civil rights laws for LGBTQ people with litigation seeking exemptions based on the First Amendment, such as the Masterpiece Cakeshop case.

Kristen Waggoner, president of Alliance Defending Freedom, wrote in a Sept. 12 legal brief signed by her and other attorneys that a decision in favor of 303 Creative boils down to a clear-cut violation of the First Amendment.

“Colorado and the United States still contend that CADA only regulates sales transactions,” the brief says. “But their cases do not apply because they involve non-expressive activities: selling BBQ, firing employees, restricting school attendance, limiting club memberships, and providing room access. Colorado’s own cases agree that the government may not use public-accommodation laws to affect a commercial actor’s speech.”

Pizer, however, pushed back strongly on the idea a decision in favor of 303 Creative would be as focused as Alliance Defending Freedom purports it would be, arguing it could open the door to widespread discrimination against LGBTQ people.

“One way to put it is art tends to be in the eye of the beholder,” Pizer said. “Is something of a craft, or is it art? I feel like I’m channeling Lily Tomlin. Remember ‘soup and art’? We have had an understanding that whether something is beautiful or not is not the determining factor about whether something is protected as artistic expression. There’s a legal test that recognizes if this is speech, whose speech is it, whose message is it? Would anyone who was hearing the speech or seeing the message understand it to be the message of the customer or of the merchants or craftsmen or business person?”

Despite the implications in the case for LGBTQ rights, 303 Creative may have supporters among LGBTQ people who consider themselves proponents of free speech.

One joint friend-of-the-court brief before the Supreme Court, written by Dale Carpenter, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who’s written in favor of LGBTQ rights, and Eugene Volokh, a First Amendment legal scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles, argues the case is an opportunity to affirm the First Amendment applies to goods and services that are uniquely expressive.

“Distinguishing expressive from non-expressive products in some contexts might be hard, but the Tenth Circuit agreed that Smith’s product does not present a hard case,” the brief says. “Yet that court (and Colorado) declined to recognize any exemption for products constituting speech. The Tenth Circuit has effectively recognized a state interest in subjecting the creation of speech itself to antidiscrimination laws.”

Oral arguments in the case aren’t yet set, but may be announced soon. Set to defend the state of Colorado and enforcement of its non-discrimination law in the case is Colorado Solicitor General Eric Reuel Olson. Just this week, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would grant the request to the U.S. solicitor general to present arguments before the justices on behalf of the Biden administration.

With a 6-3 conservative majority on the court that has recently scrapped the super-precedent guaranteeing the right to abortion, supporters of LGBTQ rights may think the outcome of the case is all but lost, especially amid widespread fears same-sex marriage would be next on the chopping block. After the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against 303 Creative in the lawsuit, the simple action by the Supreme Court to grant review in the lawsuit suggests they are primed to issue a reversal and rule in favor of the company.

Pizer, acknowledging the call to action issued by LGBTQ groups in the aftermath of the Dobbs decision, conceded the current Supreme Court issuing the ruling in this case is “a terrifying prospect,” but cautioned the issue isn’t so much the makeup of the court but whether or not justices will continue down the path of abolishing case law.

“I think the question that we’re facing with respect to all of the cases or at least many of the cases that are in front of the court right now, is whether this court is going to continue on this radical sort of wrecking ball to the edifice of settled law and seemingly a goal of setting up whole new structures of what our basic legal principles are going to be. Are we going to have another term of that?” Pizer said. “And if so, that’s terrifying.”

Continue Reading

homepage news

Kelley Robinson, a Black, queer woman, named president of Human Rights Campaign

Progressive activist a veteran of Planned Parenthood Action Fund

Published

on

Kelley Robinson (Screen capture via HRC YouTube)

Kelley Robinson, a Black, queer woman and veteran of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, is to become the next president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s leading LGBTQ group announced on Tuesday.

Robinson is set to become the ninth president of the Human Rights Campaign after having served as executive director of Planned Parenthood Action Fund and more than 12 years of experience as a leader in the progressive movement. She’ll be the first Black, queer woman to serve in that role.

“I’m honored and ready to lead HRC — and our more than three million member-advocates — as we continue working to achieve equality and liberation for all Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer people,” Robinson said. “This is a pivotal moment in our movement for equality for LGBTQ+ people. We, particularly our trans and BIPOC communities, are quite literally in the fight for our lives and facing unprecedented threats that seek to destroy us.”

Kelley Robinson IS NAMED as The next human rights Campaign president

The next Human Rights Campaign president is named as Democrats are performing well in polls in the mid-term elections after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, leaving an opening for the LGBTQ group to play a key role amid fears LGBTQ rights are next on the chopping block.

“The overturning of Roe v. Wade reminds us we are just one Supreme Court decision away from losing fundamental freedoms including the freedom to marry, voting rights, and privacy,” Robinson said. “We are facing a generational opportunity to rise to these challenges and create real, sustainable change. I believe that working together this change is possible right now. This next chapter of the Human Rights Campaign is about getting to freedom and liberation without any exceptions — and today I am making a promise and commitment to carry this work forward.”

The Human Rights Campaign announces its next president after a nearly year-long search process after the board of directors terminated its former president Alphonso David when he was ensnared in the sexual misconduct scandal that led former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to resign. David has denied wrongdoing and filed a lawsuit against the LGBTQ group alleging racial discrimination.

Kelley Robinson, Planned Parenthood, Cathy Chu, SMYAL, Supporting and Mentoring Youth Advocates and Leaders, Amy Nelson, Whitman-Walker Health, Sheroes of the Movement, Mayor's office of GLBT Affairs, gay news, Washington Blade
Kelley Robinson, seen here with Cathy Chu of SMYAL and Amy Nelson of Whitman-Walker Health, is the next Human Rights Campaign president. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular