Connect with us

Politics

2024 already outpacing 2023 in anti-LGBTQ legislation

Number and scope of bills set to break records

Published

on

(Photo by Landon Richie)

On Wednesday, the Missouri General Assembly was slated to discuss eight anti-trans bills, from regulations barring “discrimination” against health providers who refuse to perform gender affirming care to an exclusionary “bathroom bill.”

Legislative researcher Erin Reed told the Washington Blade on Tuesday that she expects these items will leave no room for other business: “This happened last year on a number of occasions” with hearings that began at 9 a.m. and stretched past midnight.

Missouri “had one day last year where they heard several sports bans and several health care bans and then several drag bans in the same day,” she said. “The idea, I think, is to truly wear people down.”

The Show-Me State’s legislative calendar this week is almost rote: 17 days into the new year, lawmakers in Congress and in statehouses across the country are considering more than 275 anti-trans bills according to the Trans Legislative Tracker and ACLU.

With 150+ pieces of legislation that were carried over from last year and some 100+ new bills, 2024 could break records that have been set for each of the past three consecutive years. “Our count right now is 230 have been introduced this year,” Reed said, referring to new bills. “The number has been going up really quickly.”

“Across the country, state and local politicians have declared war on freedoms, including the freedom to get necessary medical care, a good education, and to simply exist without fear of violence or state-sanctioned discrimination,” Human Rights Campaign National Press Secretary Brandon Wolf told the Washington Blade.

“The result has been a crisis for millions of LGBTQ+ people, many of whom have been forced to flee their states to access basic civil liberties,” he said, adding, “The 2024 attacks on freedom are already accelerating. MAGA politicians are already doubling down on the agenda to strip transgender people of lifesaving care, ban more books, censor more curriculum, and wield state statutes as a weapon against people’s freedom to exist as their authentic selves.”

Anti-trans legislation can be difficult to categorize. Bills restricting trans young people’s ability to play on sports teams that align with their gender identity, for example, often including sweeping binary and exclusionary definitions of gender and sex.

Bans and restrictions on healthcare remain popular. Measures targeting access to medically necessary healthcare interventions that are supported by every mainstream scientific and medical organization with relevant clinical expertise have surged, totaling 179 bills in 2023 and 68 so far in 2024, according to the Trans Legislative Tracker.

Overall, compared to last year, Reed said, “the frequency of the bills is higher right now. And there are still state legislatures that are not fully in session.”

And looking ahead, the pace is unlikely to taper off as Republican presidential candidates including the party’s frontrunner, former President Donald Trump, have made anti-trans policy proposals and rhetoric cornerstones of their campaigns, Reed noted.

For instance, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis will participate in a meeting Wednesday in South Carolina focused on “trans people in sports — and so, we’re gonna see more of these bills proposed and the heat and the pressure has ratcheted up this year,” she said.

“There’s already a lot of lack of understanding of transgender people in the United States and Republicans have taken advantage of that,” Reed said. “That lack of understanding is, I think, magnified whenever it comes to sports and whenever it comes to the expectations people have of trans people and our bodies and what we look like and who we are.”

Not only is anti-trans legislative activity outpacing that which was seen last year, but Reed said the scope of bills targeting the LGBTQ community has broadened relative to 2023.

“Some of the states might have passed a sports ban but didn’t pass a drag ban. Some of the states that passed a drag ban might not have passed a sports ban. And so now we’re seeing all of those states kind of say, ‘OK, let’s do that too.'”

At the same time, Reed said, states have expanded anti-LGBTQ laws that were passed in recent years. For example, Florida was the first to pass “don’t say gay” legislation, which prohibited classroom discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity through the fifth grade. It took effect in 2022. After other states followed its lead, last year Florida moved to enforce the law in all grade levels.

This year, Reed noted, Florida proposed a measure “that would essentially make all trans people and all people in the state of Florida sign biological sex affidavits whenever they update their driver’s licenses.”

If passed, the law would “basically end all legal recognition for trans people in the state. It takes every single place in the state law where trans people have any sort of legal recognition of their gender identity and erases it,” she said.

Reason for optimism

Toward the tail end of Missouri’s legislative sessions last year, when the general assembly was debating drag bans, the LGBTQ community and allies continued to show up, Reed said — many dressed in drag, even “at the end of the night, like one in the morning.”

She highlighted the results of the 2022 and 2023 midterm elections, where “These attacks did not work” and “most people that ran on anti-trans campaigns lost their elections — and I can name dozens of examples of this.”

Reed said she could not name a single candidate who, “running specifically on this issue as their main talking point at the end of the election” won their race.

Likewise, Wolf said, attacks against LGBTQ people are accelerating, “But the truth is: LGBTQ+ people have been here before, with fewer allies and fewer resources. We won then and we will win again now.”

He urged folks to “Show up to hearings, call and email lawmakers, organize our communities, and send a clear message: the war on freedom and equality will not win. Resistance is in our DNA. And the time for it is now.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Politics

After Biden signs TikTok ban its CEO vows federal court battle

“Rest assured, we aren’t going anywhere,” CEO said

Published

on

TikTok mobile phone app. (Screenshot/YouTube)

President Joe Biden signed an appropriations bill into law on Wednesday that provides multi-billion dollar funding and military aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan after months of delay and Congressional infighting.

A separate bill Biden signed within the aid package contained a bipartisan provision that will ban the popular social media app TikTok from the United States if its Chinese parent company ByteDance does not sell off the American subsidiary.

Reacting, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew said Wednesday that the Culver City, Calif.-based company would go to court to try to remain online in the U.S.

In a video posted on the company’s social media accounts, Chew denounced the potential ban: “Make no mistake, this is a ban, a ban of TikTok and a ban on you and your voice,” Chew said. “Rest assured, we aren’t going anywhere. We are confident and we will keep fighting for your rights in the courts. The facts and the constitution are on our side, and we expect to prevail,” he added.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre adamantly denied during a press briefing on Wednesday that the bill constitutes a ban, reiterating the administration’s hope that TikTok will be purchased by a third-party buyer and referencing media reports about the many firms that are interested.

Chew has repeatedly testified in both the House and Senate regarding ByteDance’s ability to mine personal data of its 170 million plus American subscribers, maintaining that user data is secure and not shared with either ByteDance nor agencies of the Chinese government. The testimony failed to assuage lawmakers’ doubts.

In an email, the former chair of the House Intelligence Committee, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who doesn’t support a blanket ban of the app, told the Washington Blade:

“As the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, I have long worked to safeguard Americans’ freedoms and security both at home and abroad. The Chinese Communist Party’s ability to exploit private user data and to manipulate public opinion through TikTok present serious national security concerns. For that reason, I believe that divestiture presents the best option to preserve access to the platform, while ameliorating these risks. I do not support a ban on TikTok while there are other less restrictive means available, and this legislation will give the administration the leverage and authority to require divestiture.”

A spokesperson for U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) told the Blade: “Senator Padilla believes we can support speech and creativity while also protecting data privacy and security. TikTok’s relationship to the Chinese Communist Party poses significant data privacy concerns. He will continue working with the Biden-Harris administration and his colleagues in Congress to safeguard Americans’ data privacy and foster continued innovation.”

The law, which gives ByteDance 270 days to divest TikTok’s U.S. assets, expires with a January 19, 2025 deadline for a sale. The date is one day before Biden’s term is set to expire, although he could extend the deadline by three months if he determines ByteDance is making progress or the transaction faces uncertainty in a federal court.

Former President Donald Trump’s executive order in 2020, which sought to ban TikTok and Chinese-owned WeChat, a unit of Beijing-based Tencent, in the U.S., was blocked by federal courts.

TikTok has previously fought efforts to ban its widely popular app by the state of Montana last year, in a case that saw a federal judge in Helena block that state ban, citing free-speech grounds.

The South China Morning Post reported this week that the four-year battle over TikTok is a significant front in a war over the internet and technology between Washington and Beijing. Last week, Apple said China had ordered it to remove Meta Platforms’s WhatsApp and Threads from its App Store in China over Chinese national security concerns.

A spokesperson for the ACLU told the Blade in a statement that “banning or requiring divestiture of TikTok would set an alarming global precedent for excessive government control over social media platforms.”

LGBTQ TikToker users are alarmed, fearing that a ban will represent the disruption of networks of support and activism. However, queer social media influencers who operate on multiple platforms expressed some doubts as to long term impact.

Los Angeles Blade contributor Chris Stanley told the Blade:

“It might affect us slightly, because TikTok is so easy to go viral on. Which obviously means more brand deals, etc. However they also suppress and shadow ban LGBTQ creators frequently. But we will definitely be focusing our energy more on other platforms with this uncertainty going forward. Lucky for us, we aren’t one trick ponies and have multiple other platforms built.”

Brooklyn, N.Y.,-based gay social media creator and influencer Artem Bezrukavenko told the Blade:

“For smart creators it won’t because they have multiple platforms. For people who put all their livelihood yes. Like people who do livestreams,” he said adding: “Personally I’m happy it gets banned or American company will own it so they will be less homophobic to us.”

TikTok’s LGBTQ following has generally positive experiences although there have been widely reported instances of users, notably transgender users, seemingly targeted by the platform’s algorithms and having their accounts banned or repeatedly suspended.

Of greater concern is the staggering rise in anti-LGBTQ violence and threats on the platform prompting LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD, in its annual Social Media Safety Index, to give TikTok a failing score on LGBTQ safety.

Additional reporting by Christopher Kane

Continue Reading

Politics

Smithsonian staff concerned about future of LGBTQ programming amid GOP scrutiny

Secretary Lonnie Bunch says ‘LGBTQ+ content is welcome’

Published

on

Lonnie G. Bunch III, secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, appears before a Dec. 2023 hearing of the U.S. Committee on House Administration (Screen capture: Forbes/YouTube)

Staff at the Smithsonian Institution are concerned about the future of LGBTQ programming as several events featuring a drag performer were cancelled or postponed following scrutiny by House Republicans, according to emails reviewed by the Washington Post.

In December, Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III appeared before a hearing led by GOP members of the Committee on House Administration, who flagged concerns about the Smithsonian’s involvement in “the Left’s indoctrination of our children.”

Under questioning from U.S. Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.), Bunch said he was “surprised” to learn the Smithsonian had hosted six drag events over the past three years, telling the lawmakers “It’s not appropriate to expose children” to these performances.

Collaborations with drag artist Pattie Gonia in December, January, and March were subsequently postponed or cancelled, the Post reported on Saturday, adding that a Smithsonian spokesperson blamed “budgetary constraints and other resource issues” and the museums are still developing programming for Pride month in June.

“I, along with all senior leaders, take seriously the concerns expressed by staff and will continue to do so,” Bunch said in a statement to the paper. “As we have reiterated, LGBTQ+ content is welcome at the Smithsonian.”

The secretary sent an email on Friday expressing plans to meet with leaders of the Smithsonian Pride Alliance, one of the two groups that detailed their concerns to him following December’s hearing.

Bunch told the Pride Alliance in January that with his response to Bice’s question, his intention was to “immediately stress that the Smithsonian does not expose children to inappropriate content.”

“A hearing setting does not give you ample time to expand,” he said, adding that with more time he would have spoken “more broadly about the merits and goals of our programming and content development and how we equip parents to make choices about what content their children experience.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Survey finds support for Biden among LGBTQ adults persists despite misgivings

Data for Progress previewed the results exclusively with the Blade

Published

on

Former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A new survey by Data for Progress found LGBTQ adults overwhelmingly favor President Joe Biden and Democrats over his 2024 rival former President Donald Trump and Republicans, but responses to other questions may signal potential headwinds for Biden’s reelection campaign.

The organization shared the findings of its poll, which included 873 respondents from across the country including an oversample of transgender adults, exclusively with the Washington Blade on Thursday.

Despite the clear margin of support for the president, with only 22 percent of respondents reporting that they have a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of Trump, answers were more mixed when it came to assessments of Biden’s performance over the past four years and his party’s record of protecting queer and trans Americans.

Forty-five percent of respondents said the Biden-Harris administration has performed better than they expected, while 47 percent said the administration’s record has been worse than they anticipated. A greater margin of trans adults in the survey — 52 vs. 37 percent — said their expectations were not met.

Seventy precent of all LGBTQ respondents and 81 percent of those who identify as trans said the Democratic Party should be doing more for queer and trans folks, while just 24 percent of all survey participants and 17 percent of trans participants agreed the party is already doing enough.

With respect to the issues respondents care about the most when deciding between the candidates on their ballots, LGBTQ issues were second only to the economy, eclipsing other considerations like abortion and threats to democracy.

These answers may reflect heightened fear and anxiety among LGBTQ adults as a consequence of the dramatic uptick over the past few years in rhetorical, legislative, and violent bias-motivated attacks against the community, especially targeting queer and trans folks.

The survey found that while LGBTQ adults are highly motivated to vote in November, there are signs of ennui. For example, enthusiasm was substantially lower among those aged 18 to 24 and 25 to 39 compared with adults 40 and older. And a plurality of younger LGBTQ respondents said they believe that neither of the country’s two major political parties care about them.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular