Connect with us

National

Democrats, civil rights groups voice opposition to Trump anti-LGBTQ rule

Proposed change would enable discrimination among federal grantees

Published

on

AIDS conference, gay news, Washington Blade
HHS under President Trump has issued a proposed rule allowing federal grantees to discriminate.

House and Senate Democrats, civil rights advocates and groups against HIV/AIDS were among those who voiced their objections this week to a Trump administration proposal that would allow recipients of federal grants, including taxpayer-funded adoption agencies, to discriminate against LGBTQ people.

The opponents of the proposed rule change, which would abolish LGBTQ non-discrimination requirements implemented during the final month of the Obama administration in December 2016, submitted their comments to the Department of Health & Human Services as part of the rule-making process.

All 47 members of the Senate Democratic caucus — including those from conservative states like Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Doug Jones (D-Ala.) — signed on to the letter organized by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) against the proposal.

“This is yet another step in the Trump administration’s efforts to erode civil rights protections and leave millions of people across the country again subject to discrimination,” the senators wrote. “Taken together, these actions leave vulnerable populations unable to access the services they need. We strongly urge the Department to enforce existing federal non-discrimination regulations that protect against discrimination based on sex and religion and rescind this proposed rule.”

HHS unveiled the proposed rule change in November under pressure from conservative groups, including Catholic adoption agencies who say placing children into LGBTQ homes violates their religious beliefs. Vice President Mike Pence said in remarks last month Trump himself gave the order to implement the change.

An estimated 430,000 children are in the foster care system and an estimated 125,000 of them are eligible for adoption.

But the proposal has far-reaching implications. It would not only allow adoption agencies to turn away LGBTQ people, but also allow federal grant recipients to deny them other services, including shelter and medical care.

A quintet of HIV/AIDS groups — AIDS United, National Alliance of State & Territorial AIDS Directors, the National Minority AIDS Council, the National Coalition of STD Directors and the AIDS Institute — expressed concern the proposed rule could hamper medical treatment, including the implementation of Trump’s own plan to beat the HIV/AIDS epidemic by 2030.

“We have the tools to end the epidemic, but rules that codify stigma and discrimination against LGBTQ individuals would be a significant step backwards in the fight against HIV,” the groups write.

Because the Obama-era regulation also prohibited discrimination on the basis of religion and sex, critics also say the Trump administration proposal could lead to discrimination against religious minorities and women.

In a separate letter led by Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), one of the seven openly gay members of Congress, 72 House and Senate appropriators in Congress say the proposal amounts to “opening the door to many types of taxpayer-funded discrimination by HHS grant recipients.”

“It is easy to imagine myriad ways HHS grantees could discriminate under this new rule,” the appropriators write. “Grantees could decline to provide HIV care to an LGBT person on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Grantees could refuse services to single or unmarried parents. Grantees could force a transgender child to undergo ‘conversion therapy’ in order to access their services.”

Proponents of the rule change submitted comments as well. Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-LGBTQ legal firm, said in its response the Trump administration proposal would “allow qualified agencies, both secular and faith-based, to compete for federal grants on an equal footing.”

Zack Pruitt, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, said in a statement the rule change is necessary because “every child deserves a chance to be raised in a loving home.”

“Unfortunately, the previous regulation — finalized in the 11th hour of the Obama Administration — failed to protect all providers and discriminated against faith-based providers simply because of their beliefs about marriage,” Pruitt said. “That is not keeping kids first. HHS’s proposed rule to end this discrimination offers hope for children, more options for birth parents, support for families and increased flexibility for states seeking to alleviate real human need.”

Also submitting a comment in opposition to the proposed rule change was a coalition of Muslim groups: Muslim Advocates, American Muslim Health Professionals, Islamic Circle of North America Council for Social Justice and the Muslim Public Affairs Council.

Nimra Azmi, staff attorney for Muslim Advocates, said in a statement the proposed change “guts anti-discrimination protections enacted in 2016 and gives organizations that accept taxpayer dollars a green light to discriminate against Muslim parents and children.”

“Allowing an adoption agency or a foster care service to reject people because of their religion, sex, sexual orientation or gender identity will seriously harm families and children,” Azmi said. “If adopted, this proposed rule will undercut the core principles of religious liberty and anti-discrimination — which disturbingly appears to be the intention of HHS.”

The Washington Blade has placed a request in with HHS seeking comment seeking information on the number of comments obtained, the next steps in the process and when a final rule will be issued.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

RFK Jr.’s HHS report pushes therapy, not medical interventions, for trans youth

‘Discredited junk science’ — GLAAD

Published

on

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A 409-page report released Thursday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services challenges the ethics of medical interventions for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, the treatments that are often collectively called gender-affirming care, instead advocating for psychotherapy alone.

The document comes in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order barring the federal government from supporting gender transitions for anyone younger than 19.

“Our duty is to protect our nation’s children — not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions,” National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said in a statement. “We must follow the gold standard of science, not activist agendas.”

While the report does not constitute clinical guidance, its findings nevertheless conflict with not just the recommendations of LGBTQ advocacy groups but also those issued by organizations with relevant expertise in science and medicine.

The American Medical Association, for instance, notes that “empirical evidence has demonstrated that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression.”

Gender-affirming care for transgender youth under standards widely used in the U.S. includes supportive talk therapy along with — in some but not all cases — puberty blockers or hormone treatment.

“The suggestion that someone’s authentic self and who they are can be ‘changed’ is discredited junk science,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement. “This so-called guidance is grossly misleading and in direct contrast to the recommendation of every leading health authority in the world. This report amounts to nothing more than forcing the same discredited idea of conversion therapy that ripped families apart and harmed gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people for decades.”

GLAAD further notes that the “government has not released the names of those involved in consulting or authoring this report.”

Janelle Perez, executive director of LPAC, said, “For decades, every major medical association–including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics–have affirmed that medical care is the only safe and effective treatment for transgender youth experiencing gender dysphoria.

“This report is simply promoting conversion therapy by a different name – and the American people know better. We know that conversion therapy isn’t actually therapy – it isolates and harms kids, scapegoats parents, and divides families through blame and rejection. These tactics have been used against gay kids for decades, and now the same people want to use them against transgender youth and their families.

“The end result here will be a devastating denial of essential health care for transgender youth, replaced by a dangerous practice that every major U.S. medical and mental health association agree promotes anxiety, depression, and increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts.

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice, and no amount of pressure can force someone to change who they are. We also know that 98% of people who receive transition-related health care continue to receive that health care throughout their lifetime. Trans health care is health care.”

“Today’s report seeks to erase decades of research and learning, replacing it with propaganda. The claims in today’s report would rip health care away from kids and take decision-making out of the hands of parents,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. “It promotes the same kind of conversion therapy long used to shame LGBTQ+ people into hating themselves for being unable to change something they can’t change.”

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice—it’s rooted in biology and genetics,” Minter said. “No amount or talk or pressure will change that.” 

Human Rights Campaign Chief of Staff Jay Brown released a statement: “Trans people are who we are. We’re born this way. And we deserve to live our best lives and have a fair shot and equal opportunity at living a good life.

“This report misrepresents the science that has led all mainstream American medical and mental health professionals to declare healthcare for transgender youth to be best practice and instead follows a script predetermined not by experts but by Sec. Kennedy and anti-equality politicians.”




Continue Reading

The White House

Trump nominates Mike Waltz to become next UN ambassador

Former Fla. congressman had been national security advisor

Published

on

U.N. headquarters in New York (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

President Donald Trump on Thursday announced he will nominate Mike Waltz to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N.

Waltz, a former Florida congressman, had been the national security advisor.

Trump announced the nomination amid reports that Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, were going to leave the administration after Waltz in March added a journalist to a Signal chat in which he, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other officials discussed plans to attack Houthi rebels in Yemen.

“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States ambassador to the United Nations,” said Trump in a Truth Social post that announced Waltz’s nomination. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role.”

Trump said Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as interim national security advisor, “while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department.”

“Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to make America, and the world, safe again,” said Trump.

Trump shortly after his election nominated U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Trump in March withdrew her nomination in order to ensure Republicans maintained their narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy

Two of seven plaintiffs live in Md.

Published

on

Lambda Legal on April 25 filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of seven transgender and nonbinary people who are challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy.

The lawsuit, which Lambda Legal filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Baltimore, alleges the policy that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers “has caused and is causing grave and immediate harm to transgender people like plaintiffs, in violation of their constitutional rights to equal protection.”

Two of the seven plaintiffs — Jill Tran and Peter Poe — live in Maryland. The State Department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the federal government are defendants.

“The discriminatory passport policy exposes transgender U.S. citizens to harassment, abuse, and discrimination, in some cases endangering them abroad or preventing them from traveling, by forcing them to use identification documents that share private information against their wishes,” said Lambda Legal in a press release.

Zander Schlacter, a New York-based textile artist and designer, is the lead plaintiff.

The lawsuit notes he legally changed his name and gender in New York.

Schlacter less than a week before President Donald Trump’s inauguration “sent an expedited application to update his legal name on his passport, using form DS-5504.”

Trump once he took office signed an executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers. The lawsuit notes Schlacter received his new passport in February.

“The passport has his correct legal name, but now has an incorrect sex marker of ‘F’ or ‘female,'” notes the lawsuit. “Mr. Schlacter also received a letter from the State Department notifying him that ‘the date of birth, place of birth, name, or sex was corrected on your passport application,’ with ‘sex’ circled in red. The stated reason was ‘to correct your information to show your biological sex at birth.'”

“I, like many transgender people, experience fear of harassment or violence when moving through public spaces, especially where a photo ID is required,” said Schlacter in the press release that announced the lawsuit. “My safety is further at risk because of my inaccurate passport. I am unwilling to subject myself and my family to the threat of harassment and discrimination at the hands of border officials or anyone who views my passport.”

Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.

Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.

Lambda Legal represented Zzyym.

The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.

Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January. Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.

A federal judge in Boston earlier this month issued a preliminary injunction against the executive order.  The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven trans and nonbinary people.

Continue Reading

Popular