News
DOJ slammed for ducking on trans exclusion in ADA
Obama administration says resolution to case based on Title VII the right approach

The Justice Department ducked on whether the trans exclusion in ADA is unconstitutional. (Photo by Mbiama via Wikimedia Commons)
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders took the Justice Department to task in a statement last week for declining to weigh in on the explicit transgender exclusion written into the 1990 law.
The ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in employment, public accommodations and other areas, but the law explicitly states it doesn’t include “transvestism, transsexualism, pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism [and] gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments or other sexual behavior disorders.”
Jennifer Levi, director of GLAD’s trans rights project, said the Justice Department’s decision to avoid the trans exclusion in a statement of interest filed on July 21 is “surprising and disappointing.”
“Given the rank animus behind it, the exclusion serves to marginalize and stigmatize a minority group that the DOJ has recognized needs and deserves legal protections,” Levi said.
Kate Lynn Blatt, a transgender employee at the hunter gear Cabela’s Retail, filed a discrimination claim against her employer under both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, on the grounds the store discriminated against her based on her sex; and the ADA, on the basis the store refused to reasonably accommodate her by denying her use of a restroom consistent with her gender identity and the ability to wear a nametag with her correct name. Blair also endured harassment from supervisors and co-workers and was abruptly terminated in 2007.
In a four-page statement of interest signed by trial attorney Emily Nestler, the Justice Department asks the court to hold off on determining the constitutionality of ADA’s trans exclusion until the challenge on the basis of Title VII is resolved.
“The United States respectfully requests that the Court defer ruling upon Plaintiff’s constitutional challenge to the GID Exclusion until after the Title VII claims are resolved, as disposition of Plaintiff’s Title VII claims could resolve this case without the need to reach the constitutionality of the GID Exclusion,” the filing says. “Should the Court later determine that the constitutional issue cannot be avoided, the United States respectfully reserves the right to intervene or file a supplemental statement of interest at that time.”
In 2012, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined in the case of Macy v. Holder the gender provision under Title VII applies to workplace discrimination against people for being transgender. In a statement in December, the Justice Department followed suit, saying the U.S. government would no longer deny the law covers gender-identity discrimination.
Levi added the filing has two silver linings: the reassertion that Title VII prohibits workplace discrimination against transgender people and language that enables the Justice Department to revisit the trans exclusion at a later time.
“While we acknowledge these bright spots, the problem created by the ADA exclusion remains,” Levi said. “Congress excluded transgender people from the protections of the ADA because of the stigma associated with gender dysphoria. As long as the transgender exclusion remains within the law, the ADA fails in its promise to create a level playing field in employment for all people capable of doing the job.”
The U.S. Justice Department deferred to its filing in the case in response to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on GLAD’s criticism.
Representing Blatt is Sidney Gold, Neelima Vanguri and Brian Farrell of the Philadelphia-based Sidney L. Gold & Associates. Along with Law Professor Kevin Barry of Quinnipiac University, GLAD and other trans rights groups filed a friend-of-the-court brief in January arguing by maintaining the trans exclusion, the ADA perpetrates the kind of discrimination it seeks to dismantle.
District of Columbia
Activist hosts Diwali celebration in D.C.
More than 120 people attended Joshua Patel’s party on Nov. 9.
LGBTQ activist and businessman Joshua Patel hosted a community Diwali party on Nov. 9.
Patel organized the event as a community gathering amid the Trump-Vance administration’s policies against LGBTQ inclusion and DEI. The event, held at the Capo Deli speakeasy, drew more than 120 attendees, including local business leaders.
Patel is a franchise owner of ProMD Health, recently awarded as the best med spa by the Washington Blade. He is also a major gift officer at Lambda Legal.
Patel noted that upon moving from New York to Washington in 2022, he desired a chance for community-based Diwali celebrations. He stated that the city offered minimal chances for gatherings beyond religious institutions, unless one was invited to the White House’s Diwali party.
“With our current administration, that gathering too has ended — where we cannot expect more than Kash Patel and President Trump lighting a ‘diya’ candle on Instagram while simultaneously cutting DEIB funding,” Patel said.
In addition to celebrating the festival of lights and good over evil, Patel saw the event as a moment to showcase “rich, vibrant culture” and “express gratitude.”
Patel coined the celebration a “unifier.”
“From a spiritual angle, Shiva was the world’s first transgender God, taking the form of both “male” and “female” incarnations,” Patel said. “The symbolism of our faith and concepts are universal and allows for all to rejoice in the festivities as much or little as they desire.”
Savor Soiree, DMV Mini Snacks and Capo Deli catered the event. DJ Kush spun music and Elisaz Events decorated the Diwali celebration.
The Diwali party also featured performances by former Miss Maryland Heather Young Schleicher, actor Hariqbal Basi, Patel himself and Salatin Tavakoly and Haseeb Ahsan.
Maryland
Harford school board appeals state’s book ban decision to circuit court
5-2 ruling in response to ‘Flamer’ directive
By KRISTEN GRIFFITH | Marking a historic moment in Maryland’s debate over school library censorship, Harford County’s school board voted Thursday to appeal the state’s unprecedented decision overturning its ban of a young adult graphic novel, pushing the dispute into circuit court.
The 5-2 vote followed a recent ruling from the state board overturning Harford’s ban of the book “Flamer.” In a special meeting Thursday afternoon, board members weighed whether to seek reconsideration or take the matter to circuit court — ultimately opting to appeal.
The book “Flamer” is by Mike Curato, who wrote about his experience being bullied as a kid for being gay.
The rest of this article can be found on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
National
US bishops ban gender-affirming care at Catholic hospitals
Directive adopted during meeting in Baltimore.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops this week adopted a directive that bans Catholic hospitals from offering gender-affirming care to their patients.
Since ‘creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift,’ we have a duty ‘to protect our humanity,’ which means first of all, ‘accepting it and respecting it as it was created,’” reads the directive the USCCB adopted during their meeting that is taking place this week in Baltimore.
The Washington Blade obtained a copy of it on Thursday.
“In order to respect the nature of the human person as a unity of body and soul, Catholic health care services must not provide or permit medical interventions, whether surgical, hormonal, or genetic, that aim not to restore but rather to alter the fundamental order of the human body in its form or function,” reads the directive. “This includes, for example, some forms of genetic engineering whose purpose is not medical treatment, as well as interventions that aim to transform sexual characteristics of a human body into those of the opposite sex (or to nullify sexual characteristics of a human body.)”
“In accord with the mission of Catholic health care, which includes serving those who are vulnerable, Catholic health care services and providers ‘must employ all appropriate resources to mitigate the suffering of those who experience gender incongruence or gender dysphoria’ and to provide for the full range of their health care needs, employing only those means that respect the fundamental order of the human body,” it adds.
The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2024 condemned gender-affirming surgeries and “gender theory.” The USCCB directive comes against the backdrop of the Trump-Vance administration’s continued attacks against the trans community.
The U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld a Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming medical interventions for minors.
Media reports earlier this month indicated the Trump-Vance administration will seek to prohibit Medicaid reimbursement for medical care to trans minors, and ban reimbursement through the Children’s Health Insurance Program for patients under 19. NPR also reported the White House is considering blocking all Medicaid and Medicare funding for hospitals that provide gender-affirming care to minors.
“The directives adopted by the USCCB will harm, not benefit transgender persons,” said Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, a Maryland-based LGBTQ Catholic organization, in a statement. “In a church called to synodal listening and dialogue, it is embarrassing, even shameful, that the bishops failed to consult transgender people, who have found that gender-affirming medical care has enhanced their lives and their relationship with God.”
-
U.S. Supreme Court5 days agoSupreme Court rejects Kim Davis’s effort to overturn landmark marriage ruling
-
District of Columbia5 days agoCapital Pride files anti-stalking complaint against local LGBTQ activist
-
Politics2 days agoPro-trans candidates triumph despite millions in transphobic ads
-
Dining5 days agoSpark Social House to start serving alcohol
