Connect with us

Opinions

D.C.’s sexual harassment laws will better protect LGBTQ people

Leading the nation in enacting robust policies for workers

Published

on

(Blade file image by Aram Varitan)

In recent weeks, the D.C. Council passed the Fairness in Human Rights Administration Amendment Act. Provided that this bill is signed by Mayor Bowser and not objected to by Congress, it will correct some of the loopholes in the District’s sexual harassment laws that were overlooked when the Council passed the latest iteration of the D.C. Human Rights Act in 2022.

In this dangerous moment for women, transgender, and non-binary people, when it appears that incoming federal leaders are hostile to protecting the rights of these vulnerable groups, more robust local protection is a needed step in the right direction. This new D.C. law, when it goes into effect, means that more people who have been harassed because of their gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression will be able to escape unfair arbitration clauses and file, publicly, in court. Historically, mandatory arbitration operates as a tool for companies to keep sexual harassment and assault accusations a secret. 

While the D.C. Human Rights Act is, in my view, one of the better human rights acts in the country, it is encouraging to see that the D.C. Council is also willing to expand it to make sure more folks can make use of it to protect themselves. This legislation provides a series of fixes that significantly change the landscape of sexual harassment claims in D.C.  First – the act provides a more expansive definition of sexual harassment. This may appear insignificant—but it’s not! Right now, the narrow definition under D.C. law says that sexual harassment is limited to “conduct of a sexual nature.”  This covers the most egregious and brazen types of sexual harassment, the kind of behavior that often leads to news articles, like sending a colleague unsolicited sexual messages or photographs; using sexually degrading language or slurs; or asking intrusive questions about someone’s sexual preferences.  It doesn’t include, however, the wide spectrum of sexual harassment that I see in working with clients every day: harassment based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression.

This can take a lot of forms, like calling someone sex-based, but not sexual, slurs in the workplace; penalizing someone if they do not dress feminine or masculine “enough”; or spreading rumors about someone because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation. Mind you, the D.C. Human Rights Act already banned harassment based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression before this new act; but this new act now includes all of those forms of harassment as under the umbrella of sexual harassment.  

Why is it important? Federal law prohibits forced arbitration of sexual assault and sexual harassment cases nationwide, because it is an unfair forum for survivors of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Under federal law, courts have recognized that sex-based conduct may create a hostile work environment constituting sexual harassment, whether or not the conduct is “sexual in nature.” But the D.C. Human Rights Act, until this latest expansion, limited sexual harassment to conduct that is sexual in nature. As a result, harassment based on gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity could be forced to go to unfair arbitration in D.C. – which this new law fixes.  Provided this is signed into law and Congress does not object, those who have been harassed on these bases will be able to publicly pursue these claims against their employers in court.

In addition to this meaningful expansion of the definition of sexual harassment, this new law also increases the statute of limitations of when claims can be brought from one year to two years. This extends the time a person who experiences harassment has to file a claim.

Many of these changes demonstrate the District’s commitment to leading the nation in enacting robust protections for workers and in resisting sexual harassment in all of its forms. I’m grateful to the D.C. Council for their work to make these changes a reality.


Mx. Rachel Green is a plaintiffs’ sexual harassment attorney at Katz Banks Kumin LLP and advocated before the D.C. Council for many of these changes to the law.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Letter-to-the-Editor

Candidates should pledge to nominate LGBTQ judge to Supreme Court

Presidential, Senate hopefuls need to go on the record

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

As soon as the final votes are cast and counted and verified after the November 2026 elections are over, the 2028 presidential cycle will begin in earnest. Polls, financial aid requests, and volunteer opportunities ad infinitum will flood the public and personal media. There will be more issues than candidates in both parties. The rending of garments and mudslinging will be both interesting and maybe even amusing as citizens will watch how candidates react to each and every issue of the day.

There is one particular item that I am hoping each candidate will be asked whether in private or in public. If a Supreme Court vacancy occurs in your potential administration, will you nominate an open and qualified LGBTQ to join the remaining eight?

Other interest groups on both sides have made similar demands over the years and have had them honored. Is it not time that our voices are raised as well? There are several already sitting judges on both state and federal benches that have either been elected statewide or approved by the U.S. Senate.

Our communities are being utilized and abused on judicial menus. Enough already! Challenge each and every candidate, regardless of their party with our honest question and see if honest answers are given. By the way … no harm in asking the one-third of the U.S. Senate candidates too who will be on ballots. Looking forward to any candidate tap dancing!

Continue Reading

Opinions

2026 elections will bring major changes to D.C. government

Mayor’s office, multiple Council seats up for grabs

Published

on

(Washington Blade file image by Aram Vartian)

Next year will be a banner year for elections in D.C. The mayor announced she will not run. Two Council members, Anita Bonds, At-large, and Brianne Nadeau, Ward 1, have announced they will not run. Waiting for Del. Norton to do the same, but even if she doesn’t, there will be a real race for that office. 

So far, Robert White, Council member at-large, and Brooke Pinto, Council member Ward 2, are among a host of others, who have announced. If one of these Council members should win, there would be a special election for their seat. If Kenyon McDuffie, Council member at-large, announces for mayor as a Democrat, which he is expected to do, he will have to resign his seat on the Council as he fills one of the non-Democratic seats there. Janeese George, Ward 4 Council member, announced she is running for mayor. Should she win, there would be a special election for her seat. Another special election could happen if Trayon White, Ward 8, is convicted of his alleged crimes, when he is brought to trial in January. Both the Council chair, and attorney general, have announced they are seeking reelection, along with a host of other offices that will be on the ballot.  

Many of the races could look like the one in Ward 1 where at least six people have already announced. They include three members of the LGBTQ community. It seems the current leader in that race is Jackie Reyes Yanes, a Latina activist, not a member of the LGBTQ community, who worked for Mayor Fenty as head of the Latino Affairs Office, and for Mayor Bowser as head of the Office of Community Affairs. About eight, including the two Council members, have already announced they are running for the delegate seat.

I am often asked by candidates for an endorsement. The reason being my years as a community, LGBTQ, and Democratic, activist; and my ability to endorse in my column in the Washington Blade. The only candidate I endorsed so far is Phil Mendelson, for Council chair. While he and I don’t always agree on everything, he’s a staunch supporter of the LGBTQ community, a rational person, and we need someone with a steady hand if there really are six new Council members, out of the 13. 

When candidates call, they realize I am a policy wonk. My unsolicited advice to all candidates is: Do more than talk in generalities, be specific and honest as to what you think you can do, if elected. Candidates running for a legislative office, should talk about what bills they will support, and then what new ones they will introduce. What are the first three things you will focus on for your constituents, if elected. If you are running against an incumbent, what do you think you can do differently than the person you hope to replace? For any new policies and programs you propose, if there is a cost, let constituents know how you intend to pay for them. Take the time to learn the city budget, and how money is currently being spent. The more information you have at your fingertips, the smarter you sound, and voters respect that, at least many do. If you are running for mayor, you need to develop a full platform, covering all the issues the city will face, something I have helped a number of previous mayors do. The next mayor will continue to have to deal with the felon in the White House. He/she/they will have to ensure he doesn’t try to eliminate home rule. The next mayor will have to understand how to walk a similar tightrope Mayor Bowser has balanced so effectively. 

Currently, the District provides lots of public money to candidates. If you decide to take it, know the details. The city makes it too easy to get. But while it is available, take advantage of it. One new variable in this election is the implementation of rank-choice voting. It will impact how you campaign. If you attack another candidate, you may not be the second, or even third, choice, of their strongest supporters. 

Each candidate needs a website. Aside from asking for donations and volunteers, it should have a robust issues section, biography, endorsements, and news. One example I share with candidates is my friend Zach Wahls’s website. He is running for United States Senate from Iowa. It is a comprehensive site, easy to navigate, with concise language, and great pictures. One thing to remember is that D.C. is overwhelmingly Democratic. Chances are the winner of the Democratic primary will win the general election. 

Potential candidates should read the DCBOE calendar. Petitions will be available at the Board of Elections on Jan. 23, with the primary on June 16th, and general election on Nov. 3. So, ready, set, go! 


Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Lighting candles in a time of exhaustion

Gunmen killed 15 people at Sydney Hanukkah celebration

Published

on

(YouTube screenshot via Reuters)

In the wake of the shooting at Bondi Beach that targeted Jews, many of us are sitting with a familiar feeling: exhaustion. Not shock or surprise, but the deep weariness that comes from knowing this violence continues. It is yet another reminder that antisemitism remains persistent.

Bondi Beach is far from Washington, D.C., but antisemitism does not respect geography. When Jews are attacked anywhere, Jews everywhere feel it. We check on family and friends, absorb the headlines, and brace ourselves for the quiet, numbing normalization that has followed acts of mass violence.

Many of us live at an intersection where threats can come from multiple directions. As a community, we have embraced the concept of intersectional identity, and yet in queer spaces, many LGBTQ+ Jews are being implicitly or explicitly asked to play down our Jewishness. Jews hesitate before wearing a Magen David or a kippah. Some of us have learned to compartmentalize our identities, deciding which part of ourselves feels safest to lead with. Are we welcome as queer people only if we mute our Jewishness? Are those around us able to acknowledge that our fear is not abstract, but rooted in a lived reality, one in which our friends and family are directly affected by the rise in antisemitic violence, globally and here at home?

As a result of these experiences, many LGBTQ+ Jews feel a growing fatigue. We are told, implicitly or explicitly, that our fear is inconvenient; that Jewish trauma must be contextualized, minimized, or deferred in favor of other injustices. Certainly, the world is full of horror. And yet, we long for a world in which all lives are cherished and safe, where solidarity is not conditional on political purity or on which parts of ourselves are deemed acceptable to love.

We are now in the season of Chanuka. The story of this holiday is not one of darkness vanishing overnight. It is the story of a fragile light that should not have lasted. Chanuka teaches us that hope does not require certainty; it requires persistence and the courage to kindle a flame even when the darkness feels overwhelming.

For LGBTQ+ Jews, this lesson resonates deeply. We have survived by refusing to disappear across multiple dimensions of our identities. We have built communities, created rituals, and embraced chosen families that affirm the fullness of who we are.

To our LGBTQ+ siblings who are not Jewish: this is a moment to listen, to stand with us, and to make space for our grief. Solidarity means showing up not only when it is easy or popular, but especially when it is uncomfortable.

To our fellow Jews: your exhaustion is valid. Your fear is understandable, and so is your hope. Every candle lit this Chanuka is an act of resilience. Every refusal to hide, every moment of joy, is a declaration that hatred will not have the final word.

Light does not deny darkness. It confronts it.

As we light our candles this Chanuka season, may we protect one another and bring light to one another, even as the world too often responds to difference with violence and hate.

Joshua Maxey is the executive director of Bet Mishpachah, D.C.’s LGBTQ synagogue.

Continue Reading

Popular