National
A Pride wish list for Obama
Advocates seek action on marriage, immigration, job bias
President Obama (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
With Pride celebrations underway around the country — and the 2012 presidential campaign looming — many are pushing the Obama administration to take action on LGBT-related promises before time runs out on his term.
Executive action from the president is seen as the best — if not only — way to address the issues facing the LGBT community now that Republican control of the U.S. House has legislative progress unlikely for at least two years.
The Washington Blade asked several LGBT organizations for their views on the No. 1 thing they want to see from Obama before the end of his first term in office. Responses range from taking action to eliminate anti-LGBT bias in employment to taking steps to support marriage rights for same-sex couples.
Fred Sainz, vice president of communications for the Human Rights Campaign, said an executive order from Obama prohibiting the federal government from contracting with companies that don’t have non-discrimination policies protecting their LGBT workers is a priority for his organization.
“We would very much like to see the president put in place an executive order that obliges federal contractors to add sexual orientation and gender identity to their nondiscrimination protections,” Sainz said. “On the heels of a successful certification of [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] repeal, this would be an important priority for the president’s first term.”
An executive order barring government contractors from discriminating against LGBT employees has been seen as an alternative to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act — legislation that would bar anti-LGBT bias in most situations in the public and private workforce — while Republicans are in control of the House. The White House hasn’t said whether Obama would be open to issuing such a directive.
Job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is legal in 29 states and legal in 36 states on the basis of gender identity. More than 85 percent of Fortune 500 companies already have their own workplace protections based on sexual orientation and more than one-third on the basis of gender identity.
Sainz also referenced the lingering “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, which prohibits openly gay people from serving in the U.S. military. In December, legislation was signed allowing an end to the military’s gay ban, but “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” won’t be off the books until 60 days after the president, the defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that the U.S. military is ready for repeal.
Pentagon leaders have testified before Congress that certification could happen mid-summer. Supporters of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal have called on Defense Secretary Robert Gates to signal the OK for open service before his retirement on June 30 because they fear waiting beyond that time would lead to extended delays.
Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, said the top action that his organization wants to see from Obama is an endorsement of marriage rights for same-sex couples.
“Having the president embrace the freedom to marry clearly and authentically, explaining to reachable-but-not-yet reached Americans why marriage matters and how he came to support an end to marriage discrimination is the No. 1 thing Freedom to Marry wants to see from President Obama before the end of his first term,” Wolfson said.
Obama has said he’s “wrestling” with the idea of same-sex marriage, but has yet to come out in support of marriage equality and has said civil unions represent the best way to advance relationship recognition for same-sex couples.
White House spokesperson Shin Inouye issued a statement to the Blade recapping the administration’s LGBT-related accomplishments.
“President Obama is proud of the accomplishments he and his administration have made to advance LGBT rights,” Inouye said. “Working with Congress, we have passed and signed into law a repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and an inclusive hate crimes bill.
“Through Presidential Memoranda, the president has extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees, and the Department of Health and Human Services now requires all hospitals receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds to allow visitation rights for LGBT patients. … These are just some of the many examples of the steps we’ve taken so far and we look forward to continuing to make progress in the months and years ahead.”
Other LGBT organizations had their own priorities on which they want to see Obama take action before the end of his first term.
Steve Ralls, spokesperson for Immigration Equality, said his organization wants a moratorium on the deportations of foreign nationals who are in legally recognized same-sex marriages with U.S. citizens and be eligible for marriage-based green cards for residency if not for the Defense of Marriage Act.
“Immigration Equality’s top priority for the administration is suspension of the deportations that are tearing LGBT families apart every single day,” Ralls said. “Our legal team is currently working with families, on both coasts and in the heartland, who will be separated before the summer is over, unless the Obama administration takes action now.”
Under current immigration law, straight Americans can sponsor their spouses if they’re foreign nationals for residency in the United States. That same path isn’t available to gay Americans in same-sex marriages because DOMA prohibits the federal recognition of their unions — leaving their spouses subject to deportation.
Ralls said “clear legal precedent” exists for halting these deportations and said the president should direct the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department to take that action.
“The most fundamental freedom Americans should be able to count on is the freedom to share our homes, and our lives, with the people we love,” Ralls said. “The families we hear from every day need the president to act — not just before the end of his first term — but now. Every day that passes without any action means another family torn apart.”
Pushing the president to stop these deportations could be an uphill battle. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has indicated that Obama believes legislative action on immigration issues is needed — as opposed to administrative action — and “he can’t just wave a wand and change the law.”
Shannon Cuttle, director of the D.C.-based Safe Schools Action Network, said she wants Obama to guide anti-bullying and anti-harassment legislation with enumerated protections for LGBT students into passage. Pending bills that would address this issue are the Student Non-Discrimination Act and the Safe Schools Improvement Act.
“By the end of President Obama’s first term in office, many LGBT youth who have been inspired and looked up to his presidency with hope and change will come of age to be able to vote in the next election,” Cuttle said. “We need to make inclusive safe schools with protections for all students a priority such as with the passage SNDA and SSIA because without doing so we are failing the next generation of leaders of our country and community.”
Advocates are hoping that anti-bullying measures protecting LGBT students could find their way to Obama’s desk even with Republicans in control of the House. Obama has called for education reform legislation to reach his desk before the beginning of the next school year and LGBT rights supporters are seeking inclusion of SNDA and SSIA as part of this larger vehicle.
However, Obama hasn’t enumerated support for LGBT-specific protections as part of education reform, which would reauthorize the Elementary & Secondary Education Act, although he’s said the larger vehicle should ensure safe schools for students.
Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, took a broader approach in what she wants to see from Obama by the end of his first term.
“It is very simple: President Obama needs to recognize our full lives and humanity,” Carey said. “That includes recognizing our families, our marriages, our right to serve openly, the immigration challenges facing LGBT people, as well as many other hardships caused by discrimination.”
Carey said the Task Force also wants to “see significant progress on additional policies” as part of the New Beginning Initiative coalition — a group of organizations working to enact policy changes within the administration — to ensure federal agencies are accommodating LGBT people.
Additionally, Carey said legislative priorities for her organization — LGBT-related or otherwise — remain a priority for her organization even with Republicans in control of the House.
“And while Congress is less-than-friendly terrain right now, we fully expect the president to exercise leadership in protecting Social Security and advocating for the DREAM Act and employment protections,” Carey added.
The full text of Inouye’s statement follows:
“President Obama is proud of the accomplishments he and his Administration have made to advance LGBT rights. Working with Congress, we have passed and signed into law a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and an inclusive hate crimes bill. Through Presidential Memoranda, the President has extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees, and the Department of Health and Human Services now requires all hospitals receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds to allow visitation rights for LGBT patients. In other areas, the Department of Labor has clarified that the Family Medical Leave Act ensures that LGBT parents can provide care for their children in the event of illness; the State Department has taken steps to ensure that transgender applicants can obtain, under certain conditions, passports that accurately reflect their gender; and the Department of Housing and Urban Development has proposed new regulations to ensure that housing programs are open to all persons regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. On the issue of bullying of LGBT youth, the President, Vice President and other Administration officials recorded “It Gets Better” videos; the President and First Lady Michelle Obama hosted the White House Conference on Bullying Prevention; the Department of Education issued guidance to support educators in combating bullying in schools by clarifying when student bullying may violate federal education anti-discrimination laws; and we continue to believe that students should learn in environments free from discrimination, bullying and harassment. The Office of Personnel Management, through its Equal Employment Opportunity statement, has clarified that gender identity is a prohibited basis of discrimination in federal employment. These are just some of the many examples of the steps we’ve taken so far and we look forward to continuing to make progress in the months and years ahead.”
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that job discrimination on the basis of the gender identity is allowed in 38 states. The Washington Blade regrets the error.
Puerto Rico
The ‘X’ returns to court
1st Circuit hears case over legal recognition of nonbinary Puerto Ricans
Eight months ago, I wrote about this issue at a time when it had not yet reached the judicial level it faces today. Back then, the conversation moved through administrative decisions, public debate, and political resistance. It was unresolved, but it had not yet reached this point.
That has now changed.
Lambda Legal appeared before the 1st U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston, urging the court to uphold a lower court ruling that requires the government of Puerto Rico to issue birth certificates that accurately reflect the identities of nonbinary individuals. The appeal follows a district court decision that found the denial of such recognition to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
This marks a turning point. The issue is no longer theoretical. A court has already determined that unequal treatment exists.
The argument presented by the plaintiffs is grounded in Puerto Rico’s own legal framework. Identity birth certificates are not static historical records. They are functional documents used in everyday life. They are required to access employment, education, and essential services. Their purpose is practical, not symbolic.
Within that framework, the exclusion of nonbinary individuals does not stem from a legal limitation. Puerto Rico already allows gender marker corrections on birth certificates for transgender individuals under the precedent established in Arroyo Gonzalez v. Rosselló Nevares. In addition, the current Civil Code recognizes the existence of identity documents that reflect a person’s lived identity beyond the original birth record.
The issue lies in how the law is applied.
Recognition is granted within specific categories, while those who do not identify within that binary structure remain excluded. That exclusion is now at the center of this case.
Lambda Legal’s position is straightforward. Requiring individuals to carry documents that do not reflect who they are forces them into misrepresentation in essential aspects of daily life. This creates practical barriers, exposes them to scrutiny, and places them in a constant state of vulnerability.
The plaintiffs, who were born in Puerto Rico, have made clear that access to accurate identification is not symbolic. It is a basic condition for moving through the world without contradiction imposed by the state.
The fact that this case is now being addressed in the federal court system adds another layer of significance. This is not a pending policy discussion or a legislative proposal. It is a constitutional question. The analysis is not about political preference, but about rights and equal protection under the law.
This case does not exist in isolation.
It unfolds within a broader context in which debates over identity and rights have increasingly been shaped by the growing influence of conservative perspectives in public policy, both in the United States and in Puerto Rico. At the local level, this influence has been reflected in legislative discussions where religious arguments have begun to intersect with decisions that should be grounded in constitutional principles. That intersection creates tension around the separation of church and state and has direct consequences for access to rights.
Recognizing this context is not an attack on faith or religious practice. It is an acknowledgment that when certain perspectives move into the realm of public authority, they can shape outcomes that affect specific communities.
From within Puerto Rico, this is not a distant debate. It is a lived reality. It is present in the difficulty of presenting identification that does not match one’s identity, and in the consequences that follow in workplaces, schools, and government spaces.
The progression of this case introduces the possibility of change within the applicable legal framework. Not because it resolves every tension surrounding the issue, but because it establishes a legal examination of a practice that has long operated under exclusion.
Eight months ago, the conversation centered on ongoing developments. Today, there is already a judicial finding that identifies a violation of rights. What remains is whether that finding will be upheld on appeal.
That process does not guarantee an immediate outcome, but it shifts the ground.
The debate is no longer theoretical.
It is now before the courts.
National
LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times
Interest in gun ownership has increased since Donald Trump returned to office
By JOHN-JOHN WILLIAMS IV | As the child of a father who hunted, Vera Snively shied away from firearms, influenced by her mother’s aversion to guns.
Now, the 18-year-old Westminster electrician goes to the shooting range at least once a month. She owns a rifle and a shotgun, and plans to get a handgun when she turns 21.
“I want to be able to defend my community, especially being in political spaces and queer spaces,” said Snively, a trans woman. “It’s just having that extra line of safety, having that extra peace of mind would be important to me.”
Snively is among what some say is a growing number of LGBTQ gun owners across the United States. Gun rights organizations and advocates say interest in gun ownership appears to have increased in that community since President Donald Trump returned to the White House last year.
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Tennessee
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday
The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.
House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.
The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”
It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.
HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.
The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.
This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.
Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.
It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”
State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.
“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”
Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.
“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:
“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”
Calendar: April 10-16
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
Celebrations of life planned for Sean Bartel
The ‘X’ returns to court
LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times
Risking it all for love during World War II
D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America
PHOTOS: The Bonnet Ball
Key lifestyle changes can help patients cope with diabetes
