Connect with us

Politics

Gloria Allred at the DNC: Harris is ‘more than ready for this job’

Trailblazing attorney spoke exclusively with the Washington Blade

Published

on

CHICAGO — Vice President Kamala Harris, the 2024 Democratic nominee for president, is “more than ready for this job,” Gloria Allred told the Washington Blade on the sidelines of an LGBTQ caucus meeting during the Democratic National Convention on Monday.

“I met [Harris] when she was running for District Attorney of San Francisco, and she came to my office to seek my support, which, of course, I gave her,” Allred said. “I was extremely impressed with her at the time.”

“Usually I don’t make time to meet with political figures, frankly, because I’m so busy with the cases,” she said. “And I just, you know, can’t. But for some reason, I said, ‘Okay, I’ll meet her in my office,’ and I did, and I just had a feeling about her. And I’m so happy.”

Allred stressed that “we have to work to make it happen because it’s not going to happen just if we hope for it, we wish for it, we pray for it. We have to work for it.”

She also pointed out the dangers of Donald Trump’s candidacy for a second term in the White House, warning, “The Trump administration was just a disaster and a catastrophe for the country. And what they are doing now, Project 2025 in terms of pro-choice, in terms of gay and lesbian and transgender rights, is just a disaster.”

The former president, Allred said, “wants to distance himself from it” but “he can’t because so many of his employees, or former employees, I should say, from the administration, were involved in writing it — and also, of course, he’s on video talking about how great it was and is.”

An attorney whose career has spanned five decades, Allred has argued some of the most high profile civil rights cases in America, with a particular focus on LGBTQ and women’s rights, often representing some of the most famous public figures, from politicians to entertainers.

“I just want to say, my law firm and I have been involved in advocating and litigating for gay, lesbian, and transgender rights since the late 1970s,” Allred said. “I know what going back means when they we say ‘we won’t go back,’ because I’ve been saying that at pro-choice marches and gay and lesbian protests since that time.”

“No one has ever given women our rights. We’ve always had to fight for women. And this is the same for gay, lesbian, transgender, you know, bisexual, the whole community — no one’s giving us anything. No one ever gave us anything. We always have to fight to win it.”

At the DNC, “that’s what we’re doing here, is organizing, and I’m just really proud of the community that they’re here, educating people and helping to mobilize them,” Allred said. “Because we have to mobilize, we have to organize, and we have to help raise money to win.”

Trump, she said, has “billionaires supporting him,” and while Harris and the Democrats can win, Allred cautioned “we have to be really committed. There are not many days left to do it.”

“We have a real commitment, and we know how much more this election can make in terms of a difference for the community and equal rights for all,” Allred added.

Allred’s precedent-setting LGBTQ rights cases

Gloria Allred, center, with California marriage equality plaintiffs Robin Tyler and Diane Olson in 2013. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Allred told the Blade about several landmark cases that she litigated on behalf of LGBTQ clients, going back several decades, including one involving two gay men who attended their high school reunion in the 1980s and were told their photo would not be published in the book because “the publisher felt it was against his religion to publish a photo of two gay men together.”

“We sued them, and after 16 years of litigating it all the way up to the California Court of Appeals, we won,” Allred said. The matter earned media attention, as the publisher “took out advertisements in the newspapers” arguing that “he had a right of free speech and religious expression to not publish” the photo.

“Well, we won the case in California decades ago,” she said.

Allred noted that apart from the role of the California Unruh Civil Rights Act in her case, analogous legal disputes were at issue in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018).

California was, and is, at the vanguard of LGBTQ civil rights movements. So was, and is, Allred and her firm, Allred, Maroko & Goldberg. “We did the right to marry case,” she said, “I did AIDS discrimination cases that we also won up in the California Court of Appeals” which ruled that “you can’t discriminate against someone” because of their HIV/AIDS status.

“We represented Robin Tyler and Diane Olson and Reverend Troy Perry and Phillip Ray De Blieck, his partner, the four of them in our right to marry case in California,” Allred said. “And we were the first in the state to challenge the family code law that essentially said that two people of the same sex could not marry. We challenged that. We went all the way to the California Supreme Court and we won.”

Here, too, Allred’s work crossed paths with Harris’s efforts in the public sector, aided by other allies like California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) who was, during this time, mayor of San Francisco.

“Because we were the first, Robin and Diane were the first, to be allowed to marry in LA County, a day before everyone else, we know that Newsom — actually, the same day that we announced we’re challenging the constitutionality of the law [he] started marrying gay and lesbian couples.”

The attorney — who in 2022 was awarded the highest honor of the LGBTQ+ Lawyers Association of Los Angeles — noted her and her firm’s ongoing work on behalf of transgender clients, which she considers “part of what we think should be always a teaching moment for what happens so that if people see the injustice and the unfairness, then they will join with us in wanting to right the wrongs.”

Allred highlighted another landmark case in the 1980s in which she represented “two lesbian life partners, wonderful women, businesswomen, very articulate” who were “not going to be in the closet” about their relationship when they celebrated Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday at Papa Choux, a fine dining establishment in Los Angeles.

“One was Latina, the other one was African American,” she said. “They were a couple, and they made a reservation for the romantic booths, which were like a few steps up from the main restaurant” with “sheer curtains, and violinists [who] came in to play” by the tables.

The couple was told that they were welcome to sit elsewhere but “two people of the same sex can’t sit in this romantic section” as a matter of restaurant policy and also per a city ordinance. “They weren’t kissing, they weren’t hugging, they weren’t even holding hands,” Allred said, and they did not want to move. As they would later say publicly, “‘we thought to ourselves, what would Martin Luther King Jr. want us to do? And we decided he would want us to call Gloria Allred.'”

“They came to us,” she said, and “we took the case. We had to decide, is this sexual orientation? Is it sex discrimination? Is it important? Or is it not important? Is it ridiculous? And then we decided, if you think that Rosa Parks sitting in the back of the bus was important, even though the bus would still get there, but she was treated in a way that was not respectful of her right to be treated in a dignified, respectful way, so this is the same thing.”

“So we fought at the lower court,” Allred said. “The trial court said, the judge said, ‘I want to go see the restaurant,’ which was not necessary. It’s a legal issue. But he did, and then he ruled against us, and we went up to the Court of Appeals, and we won, and they reversed, and we set a legal precedent that we’re able to cite in other cases and other attorneys were able to cite that you can’t discriminate against people because they’re lesbian or gay or of the same sex.”

That was 1984. “It’s still a legal precedent in California,” Allred added.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Politics

Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028 

Former Transportation Secretary was in Biden-Harris administration’s Cabinet

Published

on

Former U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg speaking at the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told a podcaster he is considering throwing his hat in the ring for president once again.

“I don’t know,” Buttigieg told Steven Bartlett, the British host of The Diary of a CEO, the most popular top business and tech podcast on Spotify, which aired Monday. “I think I’m more inclined than not, but there’s so much we don’t know.”

“There’s so much I don’t even know about what’s going to happen this year, let alone … what we need to know later,” he added.

Buttigieg is no stranger to running for the Oval Office.

In 2019, the former South Bend, Ind., mayor was a serious contender in the Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential election but ultimately ended his campaign and endorsed Joe Biden.

In May, an Emerson College Polling survey found Buttigieg at the top of the list of potential presidential contenders, leading California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and others.

In addition to discussing his future in federal politics, Buttigieg also discussed President Donald Trump’s handling of the Iran war — which reached its 5-month mark two weeks ago — the changing landscape of U.S. jobs due to the rise of artificial intelligence, and the growing national debt, all issues he could face if he ultimately returns to the White House.

Following his 2020 presidential campaign, Buttigieg gained prominence within the Democratic Party, eventually leading to his confirmation as Transportation Secretary. In February 2021, he became the first openly gay Cabinet member to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

In addition to his experience as an elected official, the 44-year-old served as a Navy intelligence officer in the reserves from 2009-2017, including a seven-month deployment to Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg came out as gay in 2015 and later married his husband, Chasten Glezman, in 2018. The couple now has two children: twins.

Buttigieg also has an extensive educational background.

He graduated from Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in history and literature and later became a Rhodes Scholar, attending the University of Oxford, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, politics, and economics.

This is not the first time Buttigieg has made headlines this year.

In June, he went public about being falsely accused of posing a threat to his children’s safety. An anonymous police report claimed he was a danger to his 4-year-old twins and was not allowed to be with them until after police interviews were conducted.

The police report was later determined to be false. The Washington Blade reached out to the Michigan State Police to ask what course of action, if any, would be taken against the woman who filed the false report, but the agency did not answer the question.

The Blade reached out to Buttigieg’s team for comment on his potential 2028 presidential bid, but did not hear back before publication. 

Continue Reading

Congress

House blocks effort to codify transgender servicemember ban into law

Lawmakers approved two anti-trans NDAA amendments

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have codified a ban transgender servicemembers in the military.

The bipartisan vote was 212-217.

The NDAA is for the 2027 fiscal year and sets policies for the Defense Department programs and activities and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed the amendment on July 21. It stated that all personnel are required to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline.

Human Rights Campaign Senior Director of Government Affairs Jennifer Pike Bailey stated that she is grateful for the bipartisan vote that rejected President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “dangerous and discriminatory policy that has kicked brave transgender servicemembers out of the military and weakened our national security.”

“Everyone who meets the same rigorous standards should be able to serve their country. We should honor that patriotism, particularly in this moment where we are witnessing brave servicemembers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, instead of ending their careers and politicizing their existence. We’re grateful that a permanent extension of this ban failed, and we will keep fighting to reverse this senseless policy,” Bailey said.

Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, stated that he and his members put in countless hours of work to kill the amendment.

“When Americans know they or their families are going to be targeted by or not supported by the military, that leads them to avoid signing up to serve or staying in the service — making it harder to keep the ranks of the armed services full and our nation safe. My colleagues in the Equality Caucus and I will continue working to prevent these attacks on our servicemembers and their families from becoming law,” Takano said.

According to the Congressional Equality Caucus, two other bills could potentially be passed that would also target the transgender community, both of which were proposed by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).

The first was a bill that would have prohibited gender-related medical care under TRICARE and to prevent TRICARE from covering certain gender-related medical procedures and treatments, which was approved in a vote of 219-208.

The second was a bill that would have prohibited male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools. DoDEA schools are Department of Defense Dependents Schools, which is a network of primary and secondary schools.

The amendment was approved in a vote of 221-203. 

Continue Reading

Congress

Lindsey Graham has passed away. Do LGBTQ people have a right to celebrate his death?

SC senator opposed marriage equality, despite speculation over sexual orientation

Published

on

The late-U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in 2022. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Uncloseted Media published this article on July 16.

By SPENCER MACNAUGHTON | On Sunday, the office of Lindsey Graham reported that the Republican senator and Trump ally from South Carolina died “from a brief and sudden illness.” The office said that the preliminary cause of death was a rupture of his aorta due to a hardening of his arteries.

Since then, many folks in the LGBTQ community, including a large number of Uncloseted followers, have — for better or worse — celebrated the senator’s death. When we posted the news on our Instagram page on Sunday, our followers commented:

  • “Maybe he rest in hell”—this one got 194 likes.
  • “She made sure to wait until Pride was over.”
  • “And just like that the world is a better place.”

These responses are fueled by allegations that the senator lived as a closeted gay man while supporting policies that would roll back LGBTQ rights. In 2006, he voted in support of a constitutional amendment that would have restricted marriage to only being between one man and one woman. After gay marriage became legal across the U.S. in 2015, he said “I am a proud defender of traditional marriage.” And in 2022, he told CNN he would oppose the Respect for Marriage Act and later reiterated that states should decide the issue of marriage.

Outside the Washington rumor mill, there wasn’t much evidence that Graham could be gay until 2020, when adult video performer Sean Harding wrote on Twitter that “There is a homophobic republican senator who is no better than Trump who keeps passing legislation that is damaging to the lgbt and minority communities. Every sex worker I know has been hired by this man. Wondering if enough of us spoke out if that could get him out of office?”

Harding followed up with another post, writing “If you’d be willing to stand with me against LG please let me know,” and, “So far I have two individuals who would be willing to go public and support my claims. Anyone else?”

A few days later, another anonymous sex worker came forward and made similar allegations.

But after that, there was silence, with some believing these sex workers were slapped with non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). And while at least one lawyer took to Twitter saying that he’d “be more than happy to read the NDAs and look for loopholes. For free!” nobody else came forward.

That is until earlier this week, when author Jesse James Rose posted to her Instagram that Graham had paid her for sex work prior to her gender transition. Rose wrote that “Most of you know him as the homophobic senator from South Carolina but to me he will always be the man who paid a twinky pre-transition college student a fat stack of cash to do unspeakable things to him in a hotel room while he wore red lingerie.”

This dynamic has created a complicated question for LGBTQ people: Is it appropriate to posthumously celebrate the death of a man who railed against our community and used his position of power to make our lives less equitable and less safe? Is it even more fair to criticize him if he was living a secret queer life?

Or should we go high and give his track record on LGBTQ issues a positive spin now that he’s no longer with us?

In a time where social media feels like a breeding ground for angertainment, I’ll admit that the immediacy of the response to his death at first felt intense.

At the same time, I knew I didn’t want to send thoughts or prayers to a man who tried to rip my rights away.

If the alleged NDAs that Graham handed his sex workers were legitimate, they likely evaporated after his death. So now really may be the first time people can speak their truth and offer an accurate window into the absurd hypocrisy between Graham’s public and private life.

For that, I think it’s fair game to speak candidly about the story he may have worked hard to muzzle while he was here.

Continue Reading

Popular