Connect with us

homepage news

Equality Act introduced with great fanfare

Democrats introduce bill for sweeping protections against anti-LGBT discrimination

Published

on

Equality Act, gay news, Washington Blade

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) speaks at the press conference introducing the Equality Act on July 23, 2015 in the LBJ Room of the U.S. Senate. (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Great fanfare marked the introduction of legislation in Congress on Thursday that would enshrine sweeping protections against anti-LGBT discrimination in all areas of civil rights law.

House and Senate Democrats, openly gay lawmakers and LGBT advocates were energized and delivered passionate remarks in support of the measure, known as the Equality Act, at a news conference in the Lyndon B. Johnson room on the Senate side of the U.S. Capitol announcing the debut of the bill.

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the sponsor of the Equality Act in the Senate, said during the news conference the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage expanded rights for same-sex couples, but “we’ve got a lot of work to do” as long as discrimination is still permitted against LGBT people.

“Discrimination has no place in our nation’s laws,” Merkley said. “If it’s wrong in marriage, it’s wrong in employment. If it’s wrong in employment it’s wrong in housing. If it’s wrong in housing, it’s wrong in education, jury duty and mortgages. To put it simply, people deserve to live free from fear, free from violence and free from discrimination regardless of who they are or whom they love.”

Joining Merkley to introduce the 23-page bill in the Senate was Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the only out lesbian in the Senate, and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.). The Senate version of the bill has 40 original co-sponsors, including Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.).

In the House, Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), who’s gay, is the lead sponsor for the bill, which he said during the news conference has 155 original co-sponsors.

That includes each of the other openly LGB members of the U.S. House — Reps. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Mark Takano (D-Calif.), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). Other co-sponsors who at the briefing were House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), civil rights pioneer Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.).

Also speaking at the event were LGBT victims of discrimination: Krista and Jami Contreras, a lesbian from Michigan who faced discrimination when a doctor refused to treat their child; Carter Brown, a transgender man from Texas who was fired from his job because of his gender identity; and Luke Peterson, a gay man from Nebraska who said he’s lost three jobs because of his sexual orientation.

For years, legislation known as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act seeking to bar employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation — and in later versions on the basis of gender identity — languished in Congress. The Equality Act seeks to prohibit anti-LGBT discrimination not only in employment, but public accommodations, education, housing, federal programs, jury service and credit.

Cicilline said lawmakers who support LGBT rights are taking this comprehensive approach at this time because the country is in a different place than it has been in years past.

“Some might wonder why we’re taking this approach, a comprehensive non-discrimination bill, rather than the approach we’ve taken in the years past with ENDA and other piecemeal bills that would ban discrimination in one area or other,” Cicilline said. “The answer is that our community is in a different place now and momentum is on our side.”

To enact these sweeping protections, the Equality Act seeks to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fair Housing Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity.

Because the public accommodations protections under the Civil Rights Act are limited to hotels, restaurants and theaters, the Equality Act expands the list of public accommodations in which discrimination is prohibited to nearly all entities. That includes retail stores, banks and entities that provide transportation and health services. The bill also adds gender protections to the public accommodations and federal programs portions of the Civil Rights Act, which were heretofore absent from the statute.

Additionally, the bill would clarify the Religious Freedom Restoration Act cannot be a tool for discrimination against LGBT people. The Equality Act also ensures that for sex-segreated facilities such as restrooms, all individuals, including transgender people, must be admitted in accordance with their gender identity.

In 2013, many LGBT advocacy groups dropped support from ENDA because the bill’s religious exemption would continue to allow discrimination against secular employees working for religious organizations, such as a religious-affiliated church or hospital. Because the Equality Act is based on the Civil Rights Act, those employees would receive protections against discrimination in those facilities in the same way that discrimination based on race, gender and national origin is prohibited.

Amending the Civil Rights Act to include gay people is a concept once explored more than 40 years ago by the late Rep. Bella Abzug of New York City. In 1974, she introduced a bill — also dubbed the Equality Act — that would have amended the Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation. The measure never passed and eventually gave way to ENDA.

Winnie Stachelberg, senior vice president for the Center for American Progress, made the case for the bill by invoking the memory of Abzug and saying discrimination faced by LGBT Americans “is not hypothetical”

“Forty years ago, Bella Abzug introduced the first Equality Act,” Stachelberg said. “Last night, I heard from Bella Abzug’s daughter, Liz. She said, ‘Forty years later after my bold and incredible mom introduced the first Equality Act, we’ll complete the job.”

Although Merkley and Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin hinted the Equality Act should have bipartisan appeal during their remarks, no Republicans are original co-sponsors of the legislation.

That’s unlike versions of ENDA in years past, which have enjoyed bipartisan support. In 2013, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) in the House and Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) were original co-sponsors, but that isn’t the case for the Equality Act. Their offices didn’t respond to repeated requests to comment throughout the week about their position on the legislation.

Asked by the Washington Blade during the news conference if any Republicans were co-sponsors of the bill, Merkley affirmed all co-sponsors are Democrats and outreach to obtain more support continues.

“The principles involved in this, the principles of non-discrimination are broadly supported on both sides of the aisle,” Merkley said. “It’s a tradition that is deeply embedded in both parties. I look forward as we did with the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to continue to reach out across the aisle to become familiar with the bill.”

Although no GOP lawmakers yet support the Equality Act, Ted Olson, a Republican former U.S. solicitor general under George W. Bush, endorsed the Equality Act in a joint statement with David Boies, a Democratic attorney. The two lawyers were lead attorneys in the Prop 8 lawsuit that restored marriage equality to California and litigation that struck down Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage.

“The introduction of the Equality Act marks a historic moment for our country,” Olson and Boies said. “The patchwork of protections in this country has provided a crazy quilt of laws, threatening the livelihood of many of the same couples who fought so long and so hard to have their marriages recognized. That’s why we support the idea of a comprehensive approach to non-discrimination protections that would embrace LGBT people as other groups who are protected by our civil rights laws. We urge Republicans and Democrats to once again come together to support this important legislation that provides the same protections to LGBT people as other Americans.”

The business community has also begun to speak. Prior to the news conference, the Human Rights Campaign made public statements in support of the legislation from Apple, Dow Chemical and Levi Strauss.

Although mainstream LGBT rights supporters are touting the Equality Act as a means to achieve full LGBT non-discrimination protections, some LGBT advocates are withholding support from the bill. One chief reason is the worry that seeking to amend the Civil Rights Act would open up the historic statute to dangerous potential revisions on the floor from lawmakers hostile to civil rights laws. Although the Equality Act has support from women’s groups, no civil rights group representing racial minorities has come out in support of the bill.

Wade Henderson, CEO of the umbrella civil rights group known as the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, previously expressed concerns about the bill and in a statement Thursday was only supportive of the Equality Act in principle.

“The Equality Act presents an opportunity to codify these protections into law nationwide and we look forward to working toward passage of this bill or similar legislation that helps to realize the promise of non-discrimination and dignity for LGBT Americans,” Henderson said.

Asked whether that statement from LCCHR supports the Equality Act, Scott Simpson, an LCCHR spokesperson replied, “We absolutely support the effort and aims of the bill…still vetting this particular legislative vehicle.”

Serving at the event as a voice in favor of the Equality Act on behalf of the civil rights movement was Lewis, who recalled his own efforts in the struggle of black Americans in the 1960s and said, “This legislation is what justice requires; this legislation is what justice deserves.”

In the current Congress where Republicans control both the House and Senate and enjoy their greatest majority in the House since the Truman administration, passing the bill will be an uphill battle to say the least.

During his weekly news conference, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who has opposed efforts to pass ENDA, was non-committal when asked by the Blade if he’d be open to allowing the Equality Act to come up for a House floor vote.

“I’ve not seen any details on it, but I’ll take a look at it,” Boehner said.

The Equality Act is competing for passage with the First Amendment Defense Act, religious freedom legislation seen to enable anti-LGBT discrimination. Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), a moderate Republican, has proposed compromise legislation that would prohibit anti-LGBT employment and housing discrimination, but ensure non-profits won’t have their tax-exempt status revoked for opposing same-sex marriage and express the sense of Congress the Supreme Court’s marriage ruling under RFRA shouldn’t burden free exercise of religion.

Equality Act, gay news, Washington Blade

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) (Washington Blade photo by Antwan J. Thompson)

Continue Reading
Advertisement
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. GayEGO

    July 24, 2015 at 12:52 pm

    The Equality Act is definitely the right choice and should be the law as it is about civil, equal rights for American citizens, all of them. I am anxiously awaiting to see if Congress can keep church and state separate as the Equality Act does not force churches to change their doctrines such as making them perform same-gender marriages.

  2. We Hate Vine

    November 27, 2015 at 8:00 pm

    If you like other people of the same gender or think you are another gender than that should have no effect on your rights under the law. Ordinary people do not have the right to choose which bathroom they want to use and neither should transgender people. Normal people do not have the right to marry whoever they want and neither should gay people. Normal people do not have the right to force a company to serve them and neither should gay people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

homepage news

Equality Act, contorted as a danger by anti-LGBTQ forces, is all but dead

No political willpower to force vote or reach a compromise

Published

on

Despite having President Biden in the White House and Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, efforts to update federal civil rights laws to strengthen the prohibition on discrimination against LGBTQ people by passing the Equality Act are all but dead as opponents of the measure have contorted it beyond recognition.

Political willpower is lacking to find a compromise that would be acceptable to enough Republican senators to end a filibuster on the bill — a tall order in any event — nor is there the willpower to force a vote on the Equality Act as opponents stoke fears about transgender kids in sports and not even unanimity in the Democratic caucus in favor of the bill is present, stakeholders who spoke to the Blade on condition of anonymity said.

In fact, there are no imminent plans to hold a vote on the legislation even though Pride month is days away, which would be an opportune time for Congress to demonstrate solidarity with the LGBTQ community by holding a vote on the legislation.

If the Equality Act were to come up for a Senate vote in the next month, it would not have the support to pass. Continued assurances that bipartisan talks are continuing on the legislation have yielded no evidence of additional support, let alone the 10 Republicans needed to end a filibuster.

“I haven’t really heard an update either way, which is usually not good,” one Democratic insider said. “My understanding is that our side was entrenched in a no-compromise mindset and with [Sen. Joe] Manchin saying he didn’t like the bill, it doomed it this Congress. And the bullying of hundreds of trans athletes derailed our message and our arguments of why it was broadly needed.”

The only thing keeping the final nail from being hammered into the Equality Act’s coffin is the unwillingness of its supporters to admit defeat. Other stakeholders who spoke to the Blade continued to assert bipartisan talks are ongoing, strongly pushing back on any conclusion the legislation is dead.

Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said the Equality Act is “alive and well,” citing widespread public support he said includes “the majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents and a growing number of communities across the country engaging and mobilizing every day in support of the legislation.”

“They understand the urgent need to pass this bill and stand up for LGBTQ people across our country,” David added. “As we engage with elected officials, we have confidence that Congress will listen to the voices of their constituents and continue fighting for the Equality Act through the lengthy legislative process.  We will also continue our unprecedented campaign to grow the already-high public support for a popular bill that will save lives and make our country fairer and more equal for all. We will not stop until the Equality Act is passed.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), chief sponsor of the Equality Act in the Senate, also signaled through a spokesperson work continues on the legislation, refusing to give up on expectations the legislation would soon become law.

“Sen. Merkley and his staff are in active discussions with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to try to get this done,” McLennan said. “We definitely see it as a key priority that we expect to become law.”

A spokesperson Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who had promised to force a vote on the Equality Act in the Senate on the day the U.S. House approved it earlier this year, pointed to a March 25 “Dear Colleague” letter in which he identified the Equality Act as one of several bills he’d bring up for a vote.

Despite any assurances, the hold up on the bill is apparent. Although the U.S. House approved the legislation earlier this year, the Senate Judiciary Committee hasn’t even reported out the bill yet to the floor in the aftermath of the first-ever Senate hearing on the bill in March. A Senate Judiciary Committee Democratic aide, however, disputed that inaction as evidence the Equality Act is dead in its tracks: “Bipartisan efforts on a path forward are ongoing.”

Democrats are quick to blame Republicans for inaction on the Equality Act, but with Manchin withholding his support for the legislation they can’t even count on the entirety of their caucus to vote “yes” if it came to the floor. Progressives continue to advocate an end to the filibuster to advance legislation Biden has promised as part of his agenda, but even if they were to overcome headwinds and dismantle the institution needing 60 votes to advance legislation, the Equality Act would likely not have majority support to win approval in the Senate with a 50-50 party split.

The office of Manchin, who has previously said he couldn’t support the Equality Act over concerns about public schools having to implement the transgender protections applying to sports and bathrooms, hasn’t responded to multiple requests this year from the Blade on the legislation and didn’t respond to a request to comment for this article.

Meanwhile, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who declined to co-sponsor the Equality Act this year after having signed onto the legislation in the previous Congress, insisted through a spokesperson talks are still happening across the aisle despite the appearances the legislation is dead.

“There continues to be bipartisan support for passing a law that protects the civil rights of Americans, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity,” said Annie Clark, a Collins spokesperson. “The Equality Act was a starting point for negotiations, and in its current form, it cannot pass. That’s why there are ongoing discussions among senators and stakeholders about a path forward.”

Let’s face it: Anti-LGBTQ forces have railroaded the debate by making the Equality Act about an end to women’s sports by allowing transgender athletes and danger to women in sex-segregated places like bathrooms and prisons. That doesn’t even get into resolving the issue on drawing the line between civil rights for LGBTQ people and religious freedom, which continues to be litigated in the courts as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected any day now to issue a ruling in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia to determine if foster care agencies can reject same-sex couples over religious objections.

For transgender Americans, who continue to report discrimination and violence at high rates, the absence of the Equality Act may be most keenly felt.

Mara Keisling, outgoing executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, disputed any notion the Equality Act is dead and insisted the legislation is “very much alive.”

“We remain optimistic despite misinformation from the opposition,” Keisling said. “NCTE and our movement partners are still working fruitfully on the Equality Act with senators. In fact, we are gaining momentum with all the field organizing we’re doing, like phone banking constituents to call their senators. Legislating takes time. Nothing ever gets through Congress quickly. We expect to see a vote during this Congress, and we are hopeful we can win.”

But one Democratic source said calls to members of Congress against the Equality Act, apparently coordinated by groups like the Heritage Foundation, have has outnumbered calls in favor of it by a substantial margin, with a particular emphasis on Manchin.

No stories are present in the media about same-sex couples being kicked out of a restaurant for holding hands or transgender people for using the restroom consistent with their gender identity, which would be perfectly legal in 25 states thanks to the patchwork of civil rights laws throughout the United States and inadequate protections under federal law.

Tyler Deaton, senior adviser for the American Unity Fund, which has bolstered the Republican-led Fairness for All Act as an alternative to the Equality Act, said he continues to believe the votes are present for a compromise form of the bill.

“I know for a fact there is a supermajority level of support in the Senate for a version of the Equality Act that is fully protective of both LGBTQ civil rights and religious freedom,” Deaton said. “There is interest on both sides of the aisle in getting something done this Congress.”

Deaton, however, didn’t respond to a follow-up inquiry on what evidence exists of agreeing on this compromise.

Biden has already missed the goal he campaigned on in the 2020 election to sign the Equality Act into law within his first 100 days in office. Although Biden renewed his call to pass the legislation in his speech to Congress last month, as things stand now that appears to be a goal he won’t realize for the remainder of this Congress.

Nor has the Biden administration made the Equality Act an issue for top officials within the administration as it pushes for an infrastructure package as a top priority. One Democratic insider said Louisa Terrell, legislative affairs director for the White House, delegated work on the Equality Act to a deputy as opposed to handling it herself.

To be sure, Biden has demonstrated support for the LGBTQ community through executive action at an unprecedented rate, signing an executive order on day one ordering federal agencies to implement the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year in Bostock v. Clayton County to the fullest extent possible and dismantling former President Trump’s transgender military ban. Biden also made historic LGBTQ appointments with the confirmation of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Rachel Levine as assistant secretary of health.

A White House spokesperson insisted Biden’s team across the board remains committed to the Equality Act, pointing to his remarks to Congress.

“President Biden has urged Congress to get the Equality Act to his desk so he can sign it into law and provide long overdue civil rights protections to LGBTQ+ Americans, and he remains committed to seeing this legislation passed as quickly as possible,” the spokesperson said. “The White House and its entire legislative team remains in ongoing and close coordination with organizations, leaders, members of Congress, including the Equality Caucus, and staff to ensure we are working across the aisle to push the Equality Act forward.”

But at least in the near-term, that progress will fall short of fulfilling the promise of updating federal civil rights law with the Equality Act, which will mean LGBTQ people won’t be able to rely on those protections when faced with discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. bill to ban LGBTQ panic defense delayed by Capitol security

Delivery of bill to Congress was held up due to protocols related to Jan. 6 riots

Published

on

New fencing around the Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented some D.C. bills from being delivered to the Hill for a required congressional review. (Blade file photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A bill approved unanimously last December by the D.C. Council to ban the so-called LGBTQ panic defense has been delayed from taking effect as a city law because the fence installed around the U.S. Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented the law from being delivered to Congress.

According to Eric Salmi, communications director for D.C. Council member Charles Allen (D-Ward 6), who guided the bill through the Council’s legislative process, all bills approved by the Council and signed by the D.C. mayor must be hand-delivered to Congress for a required congressional review.

“What happened was when the Capitol fence went up after the January insurrection, it created an issue where we physically could not deliver laws to Congress per the congressional review period,” Salmi told the Washington Blade.

Among the bills that could not immediately be delivered to Congress was the Bella Evangelista and Tony Hunter Panic Defense Prohibition and Hate Crimes Response Amendment Act of 2020, which was approved by the Council on a second and final vote on Dec. 15.

Between the time the bill was signed by Mayor Muriel Bowser and published in the D.C. Register under procedural requirements for all bills, it was not ready to be transmitted to Congress until Feb. 16, the Council’s legislative record for the bill shows.

Salmi said the impasse in delivering the bill to Congress due to the security fence prevented the bill from reaching Congress on that date and prevented the mandatory 60-day congressional review period for this bill from beginning at that time. He noted that most bills require a 30 legislative day review by Congress.

But the Evangelista-Hunter bill, named after a transgender woman and a gay man who died in violent attacks by perpetrators who attempted to use the trans and gay panic defense, includes a law enforcement related provision that under the city’s Home Rule Charter passed by Congress in the early 1970s requires a 60-day congressional review.

“There is a chance it goes into effect any day now, just given the timeline is close to being up,” Salmi said on Tuesday. “I don’t know the exact date it was delivered, but I do know the countdown is on,” said Salmi, who added, “I would expect any day now it should go into effect and there’s nothing stopping it other than an insurrection in January.”

If the delivery to Congress had not been delayed, the D.C. Council’s legislative office estimated the congressional review would have been completed by May 12.

A congressional source who spoke on condition of being identified only as a senior Democratic aide, said the holdup of D.C. bills because of the Capitol fence has been corrected.

“The House found an immediate workaround, when this issue first arose after the Jan. 6 insurrection,” the aide said.

“This is yet another reason why D.C. Council bills should not be subject to a congressional review period and why we need to grant D.C. statehood,” the aide said.

The aide added that while no disapproval resolution had been introduced in Congress to overturn the D.C. Evangelista-Hunter bill, House Democrats would have defeated such a resolution.

“House Democrats support D.C. home rule, statehood, and LGBTQ rights,” said the aide.

LGBTQ rights advocates have argued that a ban on using a gay or transgender panic defense in criminal trials is needed to prevent defense attorneys from inappropriately asking juries to find that a victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression is to blame for a defendant’s criminal act, including murder.

Some attorneys have argued that their clients “panicked” after discovering the person against whom they committed a violent crime was gay or transgender, prompting them to act in a way they believed to be a form of self-defense.

In addition to its provision banning the LGBTQ panic defense, the Evangelista-Hunter bill includes a separate provision that strengthens the city’s existing hate crimes law by clarifying that hatred need not be the sole motivating factor for an underlying crime such as assault, murder, or threats to be prosecuted as a hate crime.

LGBTQ supportive prosecutors have said the clarification was needed because it is often difficult to prove to a jury that hatred is the only motive behind a violent crime. The prosecutors noted that juries have found defendants not guilty of committing a hate crime on grounds that they believed other motives were involved in a particular crime after defense lawyers argued that the law required “hate” to be the only motive in order to find someone guilty of a hate crime.

Salmi noted that while the hate crime clarification and panic defense prohibition provisions of the Evangelista-Hunter bill will become law as soon as the congressional review is completed, yet another provision in the bill will not become law after the congressional review because there are insufficient funds in the D.C. budget to cover the costs of implementing the provision.

The provision gives the D.C. Office of Human Rights and the Office of the D.C. Attorney General authority to investigate hate related discrimination at places of public accommodation. Salmi said the provision expands protections against discrimination to include web-based retailers or online delivery services that are not physically located in D.C.

“That is subject to appropriations,” Salmi said. “And until it is funded in the upcoming budget it cannot be legally enforced.”

He said that at Council member Allen’s request, the Council added language to the bill that ensures that all other provisions of the legislation that do not require additional funding – including the ban on use of the LGBTQ panic defense and the provision clarifying that hatred doesn’t have to be the sole motive for a hate crime – will take effect as soon as the congressional approval process is completed.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. man charged with 2020 anti-gay death threat rearrested

Defendant implicated in three anti-LGBTQ incidents since 2011

Published

on

shooting, DC Eagle, assault, hate crime, anti-gay attack, police discrimination, sex police, Sisson, gay news, Washington Blade

A D.C. man arrested in August 2020 for allegedly threatening to kill a gay man outside the victim’s apartment in the city’s Adams Morgan neighborhood and who was released while awaiting trial was arrested again two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill another man in an unrelated incident.

D.C. Superior Court records show that Jalal Malki, who was 37 at the time of his 2020 arrest on a charge of bias-related attempts to do bodily harm against the gay man, was charged on May 4, 2021 with unlawful entry, simple assault, threats to kidnap and injure a person, and attempted possession of a prohibited weapon against the owner of a vacant house at 4412 Georgia Ave., N.W.

Court charging documents state that Malki was allegedly staying at the house without permission as a squatter. An arrest affidavit filed in court by D.C. police says Malki allegedly threatened to kill the man who owns the house shortly after the man arrived at the house while Malki was inside.

According to the affidavit, Malki walked up to the owner of the house while the owner was sitting in his car after having called police and told him, “If you come back here, I’m going to kill you.” While making that threat Malki displayed what appeared to be a gun in his waistband, but which was later found to be a toy gun, the affidavit says.

Malki then walked back inside the house minutes before police arrived and arrested him. Court records show that similar to the court proceedings following his 2020 arrest for threatening the gay man, a judge in the latest case ordered Malki released while awaiting trial. In both cases, the judge ordered him to stay away from the two men he allegedly threatened to kill.

An arrest affidavit filed by D.C. police in the 2020 case states that Malki allegedly made the threats inside an apartment building where the victim lived on the 2300 block of Champlain Street, N.W. It says Malki was living in a nearby building but often visited the building where the victim lived.

“Victim 1 continued to state during an interview that it was not the first time that Defendant 1 had made threats to him, but this time Defendant 1 stated that if he caught him outside, he would ‘fucking kill him.’” the affidavit says. It quotes the victim as saying during this time Malki repeatedly called the victim a “fucking faggot.”

The affidavit, prepared by the arresting officers, says that after the officers arrested Malki and were leading him to a police transport vehicle to be booked for the arrest, he expressed an “excited utterance” that he was “in disbelief that officers sided with the ‘fucking faggot.’”

Court records show that Malki is scheduled to appear in court on June 4 for a status hearing for both the 2020 arrest and the arrest two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill the owner of the house in which police say he was illegally squatting.

Superior Court records show that Malki had been arrested three times between 2011 and 2015 in cases unrelated to the 2021 and 2020 cases for allegedly also making threats of violence against people. Two of the cases appear to be LGBTQ related, but prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office did not list the cases as hate crimes.

In the first of the three cases, filed in July 2011, Malki allegedly shoved a man inside Dupont Circle and threatened to kill him after asking the man why he was wearing a purple shirt.

“Victim 1 believes the assault occurred because Suspect 1 believes Victim 1 is a homosexual,” the police arrest affidavit says.

Court records show prosecutors charged Malki with simple assault and threats to do bodily harm in the case. But the court records show that on Sept. 13, 2011, D.C. Superior Court Judge Stephen F. Eilperin found Malki not guilty on both charges following a non-jury trial.

The online court records do not state why the judge rendered a not guilty verdict. With the courthouse currently closed to the public and the press due to COVID-related restrictions, the Washington Blade couldn’t immediately obtain the records to determine the judge’s reason for the verdict.

In the second case, court records show Malki was arrested by D.C. police outside the Townhouse Tavern bar and restaurant at 1637 R St., N.W. on Nov. 7, 2012 for allegedly threatening one or more people with a knife after employees ordered Malki to leave the establishment for “disorderly behavior.”

At the time, the Townhouse Tavern was located next door to the gay nightclub Cobalt, which before going out of business two years ago, was located at the corner of 17th and R Streets, N.W.

The police arrest affidavit in the case says Malki allegedly pointed a knife in a threatening way at two of the tavern’s employees who blocked his path when he attempted to re-enter the tavern. The affidavit says he was initially charged by D.C. police with assault with a dangerous weapon – knife. Court records, however, show that prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office lowered the charges to two counts of simple assault. The records show that on Jan. 15, 2013, Malki pleaded guilty to the two charges as part of a plea bargain arrangement.

The records show that Judge Marissa Demeo on that same day issued a sentence of 30 days for each of the two charges but suspended all 30 days for both counts. She then sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for both charges and ordered that he undergo alcohol and drug testing and undergo treatment if appropriate.

In the third case prior to the 2020 and 2021 cases, court records show Malki was arrested outside the Cobalt gay nightclub on March 14, 2015 on multiple counts of simple assault, attempted assault with a dangerous weapon – knife, possession of a prohibited weapon – knife, and unlawful entry.

The arrest affidavit says an altercation started on the sidewalk outside the bar when for unknown reasons, Malki grabbed a female customer who was outside smoking and attempted to pull her toward him. When her female friend came to her aid, Malki allegedly got “aggressive” by threatening the woman and “removed what appeared to be a knife from an unknown location” and pointed it at the woman’s friend in a threatening way, the affidavit says.

It says a Cobalt employee minutes later ordered Malki to leave the area and he appeared to do so. But others noticed that he walked toward another entrance door to Cobalt and attempted to enter the establishment knowing he had been ordered not to return because of previous problems with his behavior, the affidavit says. When he attempted to push away another employee to force his way into Cobalt, Malki fell to the ground during a scuffle and other employees held him on the ground while someone else called D.C. police.

Court records show that similar to all of Malki’s arrests, a judge released him while awaiting trial and ordered him to stay away from Cobalt and all of those he was charged with threatening and assaulting.

The records show that on Sept. 18, 2015, Malki agreed to a plea bargain offer by prosecutors in which all except two of the charges – attempted possession of a prohibited weapon and simple assault – were dropped. Judge Alfred S. Irving Jr. on Oct. 2, 2015 sentenced Malki to 60 days of incarnation for each of the two charges but suspended all but five days, which he allowed Malki to serve on weekends, the court records show.

The judge ordered that the two five-day jail terms could be served concurrently, meaning just five days total would be served, according to court records. The records also show that Judge Irving sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for each of the two counts and ordered that he enter an alcohol treatment program and stay away from Cobalt.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts

Popular