National
First openly gay U.S. House reading clerk relishes role
Joe Novotny ‘tremendously proud’ to take prominent position
Joe Novotny, the first openly gay U.S. House reading clerk, reads bills, resolutions and messages from the president to Congress. (DC Agenda photo by Michael Key)
It’s part of making history.
That’s part of the reason Joe Novotny enjoys his role as reading clerk for the U.S. House.
Just last week, he had the distinction of reading to House members Rep. Charlie Rangel’s (D-N.Y.) message announcing his intent to resign as chair of the Ways & Means Committee. That message, issued by Novotny, went through the media to reach people across the country.
Other milestones in which Novotny may soon take part could include the passage of health care reform — or the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“You just feel the energy when you walk out on the House floor,” Novotny told DC Agenda. “If there’s a vote, or even just a heated debate, if something’s happening — the feeling that you get from that room is probably unlike anything everywhere else that you could really describe.”
And yet, Novotny is making history simply by holding the job. The 34-year-old Chicago native is the first openly gay person to work as a reading clerk in the U.S. House. Charged with reading messages to lawmakers and having his performance broadcast across the world on C-SPAN, Novotny is one of the most visible figures in House proceedings.
“I’m tremendously proud,” he said. “I feel like it’s an opportunity to represent the community. When you think about the diversity in this House now — and the fact that we have the first woman speaker and we have the first African-American clerk of the House — this is sort of a Congress of firsts, so to be a part of that is a tremendous honor.”
As reading clerk for the House, Novotny is charged with reading messages to House members and ensuring legislative measures before the chamber are clearly articulated to lawmakers and the public. He also tracks changes to bills made on the House floor.
“As House reading clerk, you’re responsible for reading all the bills and resolutions that come up throughout the day — and so there are all these other letters that come and messages from the president, and so you are responsible essentially for reading and representing these people,” Novotny said.
Other duties for Novotny include delivering House-approved measures to the Senate and working with official reporters to transcribe remarks in case a House member wants them stricken down.
Novotny is one of two reading clerks for the House. The other reading clerk, Susan Cole, was appointed by Republican leadership. Novotny and Cole are under the jurisdiction of Lorraine Miller, the House clerk and chamber’s official record keeper.
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appointed Novotny to his role in December, and he’s served in the position for six weeks. No newcomer to Capitol Hill, Novotny was a congressional page when he was 16. For 15 years, he was a staffer for the House Education & Labor Committee, most recently as chief clerk for the panel.
Now as someone who sits on the podium with the speaker or speaker pro-tempe as lawmakers debate bills, Novotny is one of the more visible figures in the House.
In a statement, Pelosi highlighted the importance of Novotny’s job and his qualifications for taking on the position.
“As reading clerk, Joe will be the voice of the House of Representatives and will play an integral role in the daily operations of Congress,” she said. “Joe brings his experience and professionalism from the Education & Labor Committee, and we are grateful for his service.”
Novotny said his sexual orientation hasn’t made his job any more difficult or impaired relationships with his colleagues.
“I’ve been very, very lucky that throughout my career on the Hill, I’ve always been met with people who have looked at me pretty much just at face value, and it’s never been an issue,” he said. “I’ve always been open about who I am and it’s always been met with understanding and respect.”
But one challenge Novotny has encountered in his new role is needing to recognize all 435 House members immediately.
“Basically you have to learn every single person by name and by sight,” he said. “If somebody’s coming up and you’re at the podium, you’re responsible for announcing who that member is as they’re voting at the end of the vote or announce their changes.”
Since his years at George Washington University, where he studied political communications, Novotny said he’s had an affinity for politics.
“I’ve always been fascinated by politics,” he said. “I think that people lose sight of the fact that politics is not just about policy, it’s about relationships.”
Novotny said people “use politics every day in our lives” in relationships with colleagues, loved ones and friends.
“So, I guess I’m fascinated by relationships that people have and how everybody uses politics in form or another,” he said.
It’s that fascination with politics that lead him to take a position as staffer on the House Education & Labor Committee under the supervision of Chairman George Miller. Novotny said leaving his old job to become reading clerk was “bittersweet” because Miller is “such a great boss.”
“The thing about him is that he’s a little informal, and he likes to just be called by his first name,” Novotny said. “It’s never Mr. Chairman or congressman. He likes to be called George. So when you have that kind of relationship from the get go, you can really — you establish this great relationship.”
In 2007, Novotny was working for the committee when it sent the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to the House floor. Lawmakers in that chamber later approved the bill.
“That was really a very, very proud moment for me to be a part of that, and actually, seeing that pass the House floor in the last Congress was great,” he said.
In a statement, Miller congratulated Novotny for landing his new position, recalling the former committee staffer’s years of service on the panel.
“Joe was an incredibly valuable asset to my staff for nearly 15 years,” Novotny said. “His unparalleled integrity and dedication helped our committee advance major policies that are making a difference in the lives of working families. I know Joe will bring the same level of enthusiasm, expertise and steadfast commitment of service to his new role as House reading clerk.”
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
Trump budget would codify expanded global gag rule
