Connect with us

National

DOJ lets stand court order against transgender health care

Published

on

Jeff Sessions, gay news, Washington Blade

The Justice Department under Jeff Sessions has declined to appeal an order agains transgender health care. (Image courtesy C-Span)

In yet another blow from the Trump administration to transgender rights, the U.S. Justice Department under U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has led stand a court order against the implementation of an Obamacare regulation barring discrimination against transgender people in health care.

The deadline for the U.S. Justice Department to appeal U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor’s preliminary injunction was midnight at March 1, but that time has passed and the department hasn’t filed a notice of appeal.

O’Connor’s order bars enforcement of a Department of Health & Human Services regulation against discrimination against women who have had abortions or transgender people in health care, including the refusal of gender reassignment surgery. The regulation is based on Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits discrimination in health care on the basis of sex.

Instead of appealing the injunction, the Justice Department on Friday sought an extension of the time to answer the complaint as the underlying case proceeds in the district court to “provide opportunity for new leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services to become familiar with the issues in this case.” The deadline for that response was also March 1 at midnight. O’Connor granted the Justice Department’s request Tuesday night, giving the Justice Department until May 2 to respond.

Defying the the broadly accepted interpretation in the courts of “sex” to include transgender people. O’Connor issued the preliminary injunction Dec. 31 as a result of a lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed the lawsuit against the rule on behalf of eight states, including Texas, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Kentucky and Kansas. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty was co-counsel in the race and represented religious-affiliated health providers who object to the regulation on religious grounds.

Declining to appeal the order to the U.S. Fifth Circuit of Appeals is consistent with the Justice Department’s recent decision to withdraw a request to halt an order from the same the judge barring enforcement of Obama administration guidance barring schools from refusing to allow transgender kids to use the restroom consistent with their gender identity.

That move from the Justice Department was a precursor to the decision from the Justice and Education Departments ultimately to withdraw the guidance last week with a related case filed by transgender Gavin Grimm pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.

But the Justice Department’s refusal to appeal the order may not be the end of the case or the regulation assuring non-discrimination for transgender people in health care. The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas and River City Gender Alliance have placed a request in with the Fifth Circuit seeking to stay O’Connor’s injunction.

Further, the organizations have sought to intervene in the case with two kinds of intervention under the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. Intervention as of right and, in the alternative, permissive intervention. On January 24, O’Connor issued an order denying intervention as of right and ordering furthering briefing on permissive intervention.

The ACLU appealed the denial of intervention as of right, so that is currently before the Fifth Circuit. The plaintiffs challenging the regulation have asked the Fifth Circuit to dismiss the appeal. Briefing is complete on permissive intervention, but the district court hasn’t yet issued a ruling.

Even with the injunction on regulation in place, transgender advocates have maintained the underlying prohibition on gender discrimination in the Affordable Care Act is still intact and transgender people can still sue if they feel they’ve experienced discrimination in health care.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

New York

Zohran Mamdani participates in NYC Pride parade

Mayoral candidate has detailed LGBTQ rights platform

Published

on

NYC mayoral candidate and New York State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani (Screen capture: NBC News/YouTube)

Zohran Mamdani, the candidate for mayor of New York City who pulled a surprise victory in the primary contest last week, walked in the city’s Pride parade on Sunday.

The Democratic Socialist and New York State Assembly member published photos on social media with New York Attorney General Letitia James, telling followers it was “a joy to march in NYC Pride with the people’s champ” and to “see so many friends on this gorgeous day.”

“Happy Pride NYC,” he wrote, adding a rainbow emoji.

Mamdani’s platform includes a detailed plan for LGBTQ people who “across the United States are facing an increasingly hostile political environment.”

His campaign website explains: “New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people, but private institutions in our own city have already started capitulating to Trump’s assault on trans rights.

“Meanwhile, the cost of living crisis confronting working class people across the city hits the LGBTQIA+ community particularly hard, with higher rates of unemployment and homelessness than the rest of the city.”

“The Mamdani administration will protect LGBTQIA+ New Yorkers by expanding and protecting gender-affirming care citywide, making NYC an LGBTQIA+ sanctuary city, and creating the Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court upholds ACA rule that makes PrEP, other preventative care free

Liberal justices joined three conservatives in majority opinion

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022, to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, the U.S. Supreme Court)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld a portion of the Affordable Care Act requiring private health insurers to cover the cost of preventative care including PrEP, which significantly reduces the risk of transmitting HIV.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion in the case, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. He was joined by two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with the three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson.

The court’s decision rejected the plaintiffs’ challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s reliance on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force to “unilaterally” determine which types of care and services must be covered by payors without cost-sharing.

An independent all-volunteer panel of nationally recognized experts in prevention and primary care, the 16 task force members are selected by the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to serve four-year terms.

They are responsible for evaluating the efficacy of counseling, screenings for diseases like cancer and diabetes, and preventative medicines — like Truvada for PrEP, drugs to reduce heart disease and strokes, and eye ointment for newborns to prevent infections.

Parties bringing the challenge objected especially to the mandatory coverage of PrEP, with some arguing the drugs would “encourage and facilitate homosexual behavior” against their religious beliefs.

Continue Reading

Popular