Local
Someday we’ll be together?
Bi-national couple describes pain, anxiety of navigating U.S. immigration laws
You’re waiting on your partner and he’s late.
Most gays in that situation might be mildly irked, especially if a dinner reservation or theater tickets are at stake. Even if a few hours pass, you realize the likelihood that something serious has happened is small.
But when Kelly Cross, a local gay attorney, found himself waiting more than two hours at the Foggy Bottom Metro station last summer with no sign of his partner, who was scheduled to join him following a stint in Europe, it was a much more serious situation — it could have meant the end of their relationship.
Because the United States doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage at the federal level — where immigration is handled — bi-national same-sex couples have few options for staying together long-term in the U.S. or anywhere else. The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) further complicates the matter.
Cross and his partner, who declined to be identified because it could increase his chances of being deported, had tried to make a go of it in Europe, spending more than a year together in Dusseldorf, Germany, but a bounty of practical considerations — most pressingly Cross’s cancer-stricken mother in West Virginia — made staying there untenable. Cross returned in June 2009. But on the July day when his partner was scheduled to arrive at Dulles Airport, Cross’s panic increased as time went by.
“I was going around calling all kinds of people,” Cross says. “I thought he’d gotten pulled over and sent to the detention center where they’re double- and triple-checking everything probably. They want to make sure these folks are not going to stay in the U.S. They have no idea of his life here, his friends and family. It’s terrifying to know that you could be traveling and get the wrong immigration officer and not be able to get back into the country and I would not be able to go back and say anything and have no right to appeal anything. We’re very much at their whim.”
It had already been a nerve-wracking month for Cross, 31. Since he’d returned to the United States, he’d spent a frantic month trying to find someone willing to give his partner a job. Without that, there was no hope for the partner to stay. Though the partner’s background is in public policy, he had some experience doing financial analysis in Europe and that led to a D.C. opportunity but one that they say is more of a temporary fix than a long-term career plan.
For the couple, who got serious quickly after meeting at Apex in 2007, it was just one more in a string of seemingly endless obstacles. The relationship is strong enough, they say, that it’s worth the constant anxiety and uncertainty.
Cross’s partner, also 31, came to the states from his native Poland in 2003 to study public policy at the University of Northern Iowa. Disenchanted with Iowa, he came to D.C. for an internship in 2006. Though he liked the U.S., he was planning to return to Poland or possibly somewhere else in Europe — wherever he might find a good job. His plans changed radically when he met Cross.
“This is an everyday concern, how are we going to survive,” the partner says. “In our situation, we’re lucky that we have sufficient funds to live in this not-very-pleasant situation, but I just cannot imagine if somebody is gay and working for McDonald’s and he has a boyfriend who is working for Burger King. I don’t think they are going to make it. They won’t make it for sure because they’re not able. But if there’s a couple who’s straight, they have all the rights and all possibilities to make it because it will be possible. A law that gives them the opportunity, one piece of paper, a marriage license, that gives all kinds of rights and we don’t have it.”
The couple did enter a New Jersey civil union last summer, but they say it was purely symbolic and has little practical benefit. The partner says although he understands the arguments of those who will settle only for marriage, he’d be happy with a federally recognized civil union.
“That would be fine, I don’t give a shit,” he says. “Just anything so I don’t have this headache every morning. I would be perfectly happy with a civil union.”
Cross and his partner are, of course, not alone. Immigration Equality, a gay rights advocacy group working to end discrimination in U.S. immigration law against LGBT people, points to Williams Institute figures based on the 2000 Census that indicate there are about 36,000 bi-national same-sex couples struggling to stay together in the U.S. They’re hoping the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), versions of which date back to 2000, will solve the problem. Because its wording says “permanent partner,” activists say it wouldn’t conflict with DOMA, though they’re hopeful — as are virtually all gay activists — that DOMA will eventually be repealed.
But how are the odds looking for UAFA? Immigration Equality’s communications director Steve Ralls is optimistic.
“Now that health care is officially behind us, there are indications that Congress and the White House are turning to immigration reform in the coming weeks and months,” Ralls says. “The White House has called key lawmakers to plot a way forward for comprehensive immigration reform and as part of that process, we’re working very hard to ensure that the Uniting American Families Act is part of that comprehensive bill.”
If it fails there — and many are opposed to its inclusion — it could pass on its own but Ralls says Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, supporters of the legislation, have told him they want to tackle a comprehensive bill before individual ones. U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), who introduced UAFA in the Senate last year, is a key ally, Ralls says.
“He’s chair of the Judiciary Committee, which has enormous influence on what immigration bills move through Congress when,” Ralls said. “He remains willing and determined to pass UAFA as a standalone bill if necessary. That gives us a legislative leg up right out of the starting gate.”
But if it fails, what are the options for couples like Cross and his partner? They’re few, they say. Moving to Canada is not practical because the antitrust law Cross specializes in is not viable to practice there. Cross says he was lucky he spoke German and that his England-based international law firm was able to transfer him there, but he took a large pay cut to do it.
His partner becomes indignant at the mere suggestion of moving to Canada.
“This question is not really appropriate,” he says. “Who the heck is going to tell me where I should live? … I am entitled to decide where I should like to live because I’m your partner. We want to live here. Nobody’s going to tell me what I’m supposed to do with my life. I’m not a random person who’s just coming and pushing to want to settle in the D.C. area. We have our life here.”
And though the immigration problem is by far the couple’s biggest challenge, Cross says it’s compounded by other factors that flair up occasionally. They have cultural, interracial and homophobic issues that pop up, mostly externally. Cross encountered it often when he was trying to arrange a job for his partner.
“There’s a different sort of worth people ascribe to a heterosexual relationship that they don’t ascribe to homosexual ones,” Cross says. “There’s a presumption that if you’ve found a woman and are in love with a woman, then that must be love and there must be something there and you know, that’s your family. People attribute that and assume it’s real. But I think with gay couples there’s a mentality that yeah, you could find someone else or why go to the effort for this, there’s plenty of other people you could find. But it’s not true. When you love somebody, you love somebody.”
Cross says the challenges sometimes overwhelm his friends and colleagues.
“I think it’s just a combination of the whole thing,” he says. “Black, interracial, bi-national, gay — sometimes it’s just too much and people don’t know how to deal with it.”
Virginia
Miyares joins efforts to fight Title IX changes
Republican Va. AG part of multi-state effort
BY NATHANIEL CLINE | Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares has joined a multi-state effort to stop new Title IX rules from going into effect.
The list of new rules designed to protect victims of campus sexual assaults and the rights of LGBTQ students has come under attack by Republican attorneys general in several states.
Miyares called the changes a “dangerous overhaul” of Title IX, and said the new rules would negatively impact students, families and schools in the commonwealth. The ruling also comes after Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s administration overhauled the commonwealth’s transgender student policies.
“The Biden administration’s unlawful rule would jeopardize half a century of landmark protections for women, forcing the administration’s social agenda onto the states by holding federal funding hostage,” Miyares said in a statement. “They are avoiding Congress and the constitutional process because they know it will not pass. We cannot roll back Title IX in the name of false equity.”
Attorney generals from Tennessee, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia have also signed onto the suit, which was filed in Tennessee. Separate lawsuits have been filed in other states, including Louisiana and Texas.
Title IX, which has undergone several transformations based on the political party in office, was created to address women’s rights and prohibits any federally funded school or education program from discriminating against any student based on sex since it was established in 1972.
The Department of Education said some differences compared to the previous version developed under the Trump administration, include protections against all sex-based harassment and discrimination, prohibits schools from sharing personal information, and supports students and families.
Narissa Rahaman, executive director for Equality Virginia, said in a statement that the rule prevents opponents from weakening “crucial” civil rights protections including for LGBTQ students by ensuring that pregnant and parenting students have a right to equal education opportunities, protecting student survivors and guaranteeing the rights of LGBTQ students to come to school as themselves without fear of harassment or discrimination.
“Students across races, places, and genders prove every day that they can do great things, especially when there are strong Title IX protections in place, which is why the Biden administration’s updates to the Title IX rules are essential to ensure every student can thrive at school,” said Rahaman.
The new rule is slated to take effect on Aug. 1 and will apply to complaints of alleged conduct that occurs on or after that date, according to the Department of Education.
Protections
While the ruling protects students and employees from all sex-based harassment and discrimination, it will also impact LGBTQ students and employees, including providing complete protection from sex-based harassment, and prohibiting schools from sharing personal information.
Schools must act “promptly and effectively” to protect and treat all students and staff who make complaints “equitably.” Schools must also provide support measures to complainants and respondents, and act to end any sex discrimination in their programs and prevent any recurrence.
The rule further clarifies the definition of “sex-based harassment,” which means to treat someone unfairly because of their gender; and the scope of sex discrimination, including schools’ obligations not to discriminate based on sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
The federal agency said the changes will empower and support students and families by requiring schools to disclose their nondiscrimination policies and procedures to all students, employees, and other participants in their education programs so that students and families understand their rights.
The final rule also protects against retaliation for students, employees, and others who exercise their Title IX rights, and supports the rights of parents and guardians to act on behalf of their elementary school and secondary school children.
The rule also protects student privacy by prohibiting schools from disclosing personally identifiable information with limited exceptions, which is something the Youngkin administration has opposed.
Advocates say one of the rights students should have is the power to decide who finds out about their transgender status, to protect them from being bullied or harassed.
Virginia policies
In 2021, the first model policies for trans students were designed under former Gov. Ralph Northam to provide school officials guidance on the treatment of trans and nonbinary students and to protect the privacy and rights of these students.
However, some schools declined to adopt the model policies, and the state law that led to them lacked enforcement incentives or penalties.
The current policies adopted by the Youngkin administration were revised to require parental approval for any changes to students’ “names, nicknames, and/or pronouns,” direct schools to keep parents “informed about their children’s well-being” and require that student participation in activities and athletics and use of bathrooms be based on sex, “except to the extent that federal law otherwise requires.”
Virginia schools have also not fully adopted the newly revised policies, and state law has not changed since the policies were overhauled in 2023.
The Virginia Department of Education faces two lawsuits over the policies adopted by the Youngkin administration.
“All Virginia students, including our transgender and nonbinary students deserve to feel safe and welcomed at schools,” said Wyatt Rolla, a senior trans rights attorney with the ACLU of Virginia. “Accessing restrooms, locker rooms and other facilities that are necessary when you are at school learning is a key part of our schools being inclusive of those transgender [and] non binary students that are part of our community.”
Athletics not included
The provisions under the new Title IX rule did not mention anything about requiring schools to allow trans students to play on teams that align with their gender identity. Virginia has taken its own shot at banning trans athletes from competing in sports through legislation.
In February, the Youngkin administration attempted to challenge the Virginia High School League’s policy on transgender athletes, the Daily Progress reported.
The proposed policy would have matched with the administration’s current policies that students should be placed on teams based on their biological sex rather than their gender identity.
The Virginia High School League, which oversees interscholastic athletic competition for Virginia’s public high schools, allows for trans athletes to participate on teams that match their gender identity, but under certain conditions.
Simultaneously, lawmakers in the Virginia General Assembly controlled by Democrats killed bills, including Senate Bill 68, during the previous session that would have essentially banned transgender students from competing in sports.
State Sen. Tammy Brankley Mulchi (R-Mecklenburg), who carried Senate Bill 723, said students like her 6-year-old granddaughter should have a choice to play with their own gender during a Feb. 1 Senate Education subcommittee hearing.
Mulchi’s bill would have required schools and colleges to have separate sports for boys and girls based on their biological sex. Any dispute would require a note from a doctor.
“If she [my granddaughter] wants to play an all-girl sport, I want her to play against girls that were born girls and not play against someone that is much stronger than her or can hurt her and take away her chances of a scholarship,” Mulchi said.
However, state Sen. Stella Pekarsky (D-Fairfax) argued during the February hearing that whether students are competing with their respective biological sex or not “children of all ages, sexes have different builds and strengths and no children are alike on the same team.”
******************************************************************************************
Nathaniel is an award-winning journalist who’s been covering news across the country since 2007, including politics at the Loudoun Times-Mirror and the Northern Neck News in Virginia as well as sports for the Plain Dealer in Cleveland, Ohio. He has also hosted podcasts, worked as a television analyst for Spectrum Sports, and appeared as a panelist for conferences and educational programs. A graduate of Bowie State University, Nathaniel grew up in Hawaii and the United Kingdom as a military brat.
******************************************************************************************
The preceding article was previously published by the Virginia Mercury and is republished with permission.
Nonprofit. Nonpartisan. No paywalls. Fair and tough reporting on the policy and politics that affect all of us is more important than ever. The Mercury brings you coverage of the commonwealth’s biggest issues from a team of veteran Virginia journalists.
We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at: [email protected].
The Comings & Goings column also invites LGBTQ+ college students to share their successes with us. If you have been elected to a student government position, gotten an exciting internship, or are graduating and beginning your career with a great job, let us know so we can share your success.
Congratulations to Manny Cosme, owner of CFO Services Group, who was named Small Business Owner of the Year, for Washington, D.C., by the Small Business Administration.
SBA Administrator Isabel Castillas Guzman said, “Our 2024 National Small Business Week award winners exemplify excellence, innovation, and commitment, and the SBA is proud to showcase their incredible achievements and impact on their communities and our economy.” Upon being notified of the award Manny said, “I am incredibly honored and humbled to receive the Small Business Owner of the Year award from the Small Business Administration. This recognition serves as a testament to my team’s hard work, dedication, innovation, and impact in our local community. As a small business owner, I have always strived to embody excellence in my company’s services and commitment to my clients. My team and I are proud to represent the thriving small business communities across the country, and we remain committed to driving innovation, growth, and positive change in our industry.”
Cosme is the founder and current president and CEO of CFO Services Group. The firm is focused on providing bookkeeping, outsourced accounting departments, and fractional CFO advisory services, to growing small businesses and non-profit organizations. The company is headquartered in D.C., with team members and clientele throughout the United States. In addition to working with private business and non-profit clients, CFO Services Group partners with various economic development agencies, such as local governments, chambers of commerce organizations, CDFIs and SBDC centers, to provide free financial literacy and technical assistance to businesses in underserved communities.
Manny has served as the Vice President of Finance & Administration for the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. He recently served as the Finance Chair for the Greater Washington Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and Vice President of the Equality Chamber of Commerce. He is often sought after in keynote discussions on entrepreneurism and finance for fellow business owners.
Maryland
What Anne Arundel County school board candidates think about book bans
State lawmakers passed Freedom to Read Act in April
BY ROYALE BONDS | Parents’ efforts to restrict content available to students in school libraries has become a contentious issue in Maryland. Conservative parent groups, such as Moms for Liberty, have been working to get books they believe are inappropriate removed from libraries in Carroll and Howard counties, sparking protests, new policies, and even a state law.
The Freedom to Read Act, passed in April, sets standards that books cannot be removed from public and school libraries due to an author’s background. Library staff that uphold the standard are protected under this act. The law, however, does not prohibit removing books deemed “sexually explicit,” the stated reason local Moms for Liberty chapters challenged school library books.
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner website.
PHOTOS: Gay Day at the Zoo
PHOTOS: Taste of Point
Miyares joins efforts to fight Title IX changes
US Census Bureau testing survey on LGBTQ households
What property should I purchase if I’m not sure how long I’ll be in D.C.?
Judy Shepard to receive Presidential Medal of Freedom
Pride journey: Las Vegas
United Methodist Church removes 40-year ban on gay clergy
University students have a right to protest
