Connect with us

National

‘Don’t Ask’ changes too late for discharged officer

Revisions would have enabled gay man to stay in Air Force

Published

on

Mike Almy, a former Air Force officer, is among the plaintiffs seeking reinstatement in the military through the new 'Don't Ask' legislation (Blade photo by Michael Key).

New regulations unveiled last week to ease the burden of LGBT service members serving under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” were well received by advocacy groups — but a former Air Force officer discharged under the law called news of the changes “bittersweet” because they came too late to help him.

Mike Almy, a gay former Air Force communications officer who recently testified before the Senate on being discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” said the new changes would have helped him stay in the service when he faced expulsion from the U.S. military.

“On a personal level, it’s kind of bittersweet from the standpoint that these regulations, this new guidance would have helped me a few years ago when I was going through my discharge proceedings,” Almy said. “In all likelihood, I would still be on active duty under the new guidance that Gates issued.”

Almy was discharged from the Air Force after another service member discovered personal e-mails revealing information about his sexual orientation and reported them to commanders. Almy said he was expelled from the Air Force even though he never made a statement to the military divulging he’s gay.

Even though Almy said he’s disappointed the new regulations weren’t in place to help him at the time of his proceedings, he noted that on a larger scale, the changes represent “a positive step” forward that provides more momentum for a full repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“It’s still not a substitute, but it’s a definitely a move in the right direction, and it’s going to help thousands of service members who are in the military today,” he said.

The new changes, unveiled last week by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, will limit third-party outings by requiring such information to be given under oath, and raise the rank of the officers handling inquiries and discharges.

Almy said the new regulations will have a “direct bearing” on many LGBT service members he knows on active duty.

“The ones that I know that are still on active duty that are still serving — they’re very encouraged by the first initial step as well as the climate overall and the momentum that’s going on in the House and the Senate, and certainly the Pentagon, to fully repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’” he said.

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said his organization is still examining the implications of the changes and what they mean for LGBT service members.

“It’s premature to say until we complete our legal analysis,” he said. “I think it will be helpful for some service members. It will reduce the number of investigations and, therefore, it will, in all likelihood, reduce the number of discharges.”

Sarvis said he wasn’t yet in a position to quantify how discharges would be reduced under the new regulations, but he noted that fewer people would face “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” discharges.

Among the issues SLDN is examining, Sarvis said, is what will happen in pending cases where a service member was outed by a third party under the old regulations, and subsequently announced their sexual orientation of their own accord.

“I would imagine in many cases that service members who are in the pipeline for discharge under the old regulations and the old [Department of Defense] directives, in essence, would have the opportunity to start over again,” he said. “In many cases, we know it’ll go back to their commanders.”

As SLDN examines the changes, Sarvis said his organization plans to publish this week new guidance for LGBT service members serving under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” He said SLDN has received numerous inquiries from active duty and reserve service members regarding the new regulations.

Among those serving who are pleased with the changes is a gay U.S. Army soldier currently in Iraq, who spoke to DC Agenda on condition of anonymity to avoid being discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

The soldier, who has been seeing a psychotherapist in part because of the stress of serving under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” said the new change allowing LGBT service members to disclose their sexual orientation to mental health experts would be particularly beneficial for him.

During his therapy sessions, the soldier said he had been dodging questions about his sexual orientation, or even unrelated matters that he thought may have outed him under the law. But with the new regulations in place, the soldier said he plans to come out to his psychotherapist in an upcoming session.

“In my particular instance, it’s the fact that I can talk about more than just any problems that I’m having at work or any problems that I’m having at home,” he said. “I can talk about issues that I’m having with my ex-boyfriend — and just identity issues. It just takes off a lot of stress because you can discuss more without having to censor yourself.”

The soldier said he also thinks Gates’ decision to raise the rank of those starting and conducting inquiries under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was “a remarkably ingenious way” to limit discharges.

“It makes it virtually un-enforceable, except for cases where disclosure would be unprofessional anyway,” the soldier said. “Generals [and] admirals have far more important things to do than worry about whether Private John Smith, or Lt. Jane Doe, are homosexual.”

Another case on which the new regulations could have an impact is the pending discharge of Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, an Air Force pilot who’s facing discharge under the law.

In 2008, Fehrenbach was accused of raping another man and was only able to clear his name after saying he had consensual sex with his accuser. But his admission of having homosexual sex meant outing himself under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Sarvis said he doesn’t think Fehrenbach is moving toward discharge as a result of the new announcement.

“But I think in all likelihood, his file should go back to the [the commanding officer] and the [commanding officer] will make a determination on whether or not to reinitiate the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ investigation,” Sarvis said. “Without going into a great deal of detail, we think that there may be more than one avenue that will be beneficial for Lt. Col. Fehrenbach under the changes announced by Secretary Gates last week.”

Sarvis said SLDN has advised Fehrenbach not to engage in further media interviews while his case is pending.

What affect the new regulations will have on efforts to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislatively remains to be seen. Sarvis said the new regulations could “work both ways” in the effort to repeal, leading some members of Congress to say the situation has been addressed and others to say discharges must be reduced to zero.

“One side will say, ‘What’s the rush? Why should Congress have to deal with this? Secretary Gates and Adm. Mullen just announced some significant changes?” Sarvis said. “And the flip side of that is, ‘OK, they’ve made some changes, but you still have the statute on the books. You’re not getting down to zero discharges because of sexual orientation until you repeal the statute.”

Sarvis said that full repeal is necessary to eliminate completely the discharges of LGBT service members.

“The most important thing is ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ has not gone away,” he said. “Service members are still at risk and LGBT service members cannot serve openly under ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

4th Circuit rules gender identity is a protected characteristic

Ruling a response to N.C., W.Va. legal challenges

Published

on

Lewis F. Powell Jr. Courthouse in Richmond, Va. (Photo courtesy of the U.S. Courts/GSA)

BY ERIN REED | The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday that transgender people are a protected class and that Medicaid bans on trans care are unconstitutional.

Furthermore, the court ruled that discriminating based on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria is discrimination based on gender identity and sex. The ruling is in response to lower court challenges against state laws and policies in North Carolina and West Virginia that prevent trans people on state plans or Medicaid from obtaining coverage for gender-affirming care; those lower courts found such exclusions unconstitutional.

In issuing the final ruling, the 4th Circuit declared that trans exclusions were “obviously discriminatory” and were “in violation of the equal protection clause” of the Constitution, upholding lower court rulings that barred the discriminatory exclusions.

The 4th Circuit ruling focused on two cases in states within its jurisdiction: North Carolina and West Virginia. In North Carolina, trans state employees who rely on the State Health Plan were unable to use it to obtain gender-affirming care for gender dysphoria diagnoses.

In West Virginia, a similar exclusion applied to those on the state’s Medicaid plan for surgeries related to a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Both exclusions were overturned by lower courts, and both states appealed to the 4th Circuit.

Attorneys for the states had argued that the policies were not discriminatory because the exclusions for gender affirming care “apply to everyone, not just transgender people.” The majority of the court, however, struck down such a claim, pointing to several other cases where such arguments break down, such as same-sex marriage bans “applying to straight, gay, lesbian, and bisexual people equally,” even though straight people would be entirely unaffected by such bans.

Other cases cited included literacy tests, a tax on wearing kippot for Jewish people, and interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia.

See this portion of the court analysis here:

4th Circuit rules against legal argument that trans treatment bans do not discriminate against trans people because ‘they apply to everyone.’

Of particular note in the majority opinion was a section on Geduldig v. Aiello that seemed laser-targeted toward an eventual U.S. Supreme Court decision on discriminatory policies targeting trans people. Geduldig v. Aiello, a 1974 ruling, determined that pregnancy discrimination is not inherently sex discrimination because it does not “classify on sex,” but rather, on pregnancy status.

Using similar arguments, the states claimed that gender affirming care exclusions did not classify or discriminate based on trans status or sex, but rather, on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and treatments to alleviate that dysphoria.

The majority was unconvinced, ruling, “gender dysphoria is so intimately related to transgender status as to be virtually indistinguishable from it. The excluded treatments aim at addressing incongruity between sex assigned at birth and gender identity, the very heart of transgender status.” In doing so, the majority cited several cases, many from after Geduldig was decided.

Notably, Geduldig was cited in both the 6th and 11th Circuit decisions upholding gender affirming care bans in a handful of states.

The court also pointed to the potentially ridiculous conclusions that strict readings of what counts as proxy discrimination could lead to, such as if legislators attempted to use “XX chromosomes” and “XY chromosomes” to get around sex discrimination policies:

The 4th Circuit majority rebuts the state’s proxy discrimination argument.

Importantly, the court also rebutted recent arguments that Bostock applies only to “limited Title VII claims involving employers who fired” LGBTQ employees, and not to Title IX, which the Affordable Care Act’s anti-discrimination mandate references. The majority stated that this is not the case, and that there is “nothing in Bostock to suggest the holding was that narrow.”

Ultimately, the court ruled that the exclusions on trans care violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. The court also ruled that the West Virginia Medicaid Program violates the Medicaid Act and the anti-discrimination provisions of the Affordable Care Act.

Additionally, the court upheld the dismissal of anti-trans expert testimony for lacking relevant expertise. West Virginia and North Carolina must end trans care exclusions in line with earlier district court decisions.

The decision will likely have nationwide impacts on court cases in other districts. The case had become a major battleground for trans rights, with dozens of states filing amicus briefs in favor or against the protection of the equal process rights of trans people. Twenty-one Republican states filed an amicus brief in favor of denying trans people anti-discrimination protections in healthcare, and 17 Democratic states joined an amicus brief in support of the healthcare rights of trans individuals.

Many Republican states are defending anti-trans laws that discriminate against trans people by banning or limiting gender-affirming care. These laws could come under threat if the legal rationale used in this decision is adopted by other circuits. In the 4th Circuit’s jurisdiction, West Virginia and North Carolina already have gender-affirming care bans for trans youth in place, and South Carolina may consider a similar bill this week.

The decision could potentially be used as precedent to challenge all of those laws in the near future and to deter South Carolina’s bill from passing into law.

The decision is the latest in a web of legal battles concerning trans people. Earlier this month, the 4th Circuit also reversed a sports ban in West Virginia, ruling that Title IX protects trans student athletes. However, the Supreme Court recently narrowed a victory for trans healthcare from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and allowed Idaho to continue enforcing its ban on gender-affirming care for everyone except the two plaintiffs in the case.

Importantly, that decision was not about the constitutionality of gender-affirming care, but the limits of temporary injunctions in the early stages of a constitutional challenge to discriminatory state laws. It is likely that the Supreme Court will ultimately hear cases on this topic in the near future.

Celebrating the victory, Lambda Legal Counsel and Health Care Strategist Omar Gonzalez-Pagan said in a posted statement, “The court’s decision sends a clear message that gender-affirming care is critical medical care for transgender people and that denying it is harmful and unlawful … We hope this decision makes it clear to policy makers across the country that health care decisions belong to patients, their families, and their doctors, not to politicians.” 

****************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman (she/her pronouns) and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was first published at Erin In The Morning and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

National

GLSEN hosts Respect Awards with Billy Porter, Peppermint

Annual event aims to ‘inspire a lot of people to get active’

Published

on

Billy Porter is among guests at Monday’s Respect Awards in New York.

GLSEN will host its annual Respect Awards April 29 in New York, with guests including Miss Peppermint and Billy Porter. 

Respect Awards director Michael Chavez said that the event will be moving. 

“It will inspire a lot of people to get active and take action in their own communities and see how much more work there is to do, especially with all of the harmful things happening,” he said. 

At the event, they will recognize the Student Advocate of the Year, Sophia T. Annually, GLSEN recognizes a student from around the country who is impacting their community. 

“Sophia is doing incredible work advocating for inclusive sex education that is LGBTQ+ affirming, working with Johns Hopkins University to implement curriculum.” Chavez said. 

Chavez calls the students that attend the Respect Awards the “biggest celebrities” of the evening. 

“It is really important for the adults, both the allies and the queer folks, to hear directly from these queer youth about what it’s like to be in school today as a queer person,” he said.

GLSEN is a queer youth advocacy organization that has been working for more than 30 years to protect LGBTQ youth.

“GLSEN is all hands on deck right now, because our kids are under direct attack and have been for years now,” said actor Wilson Cruz.

Cruz is the chair of GLSEN’s National Board, which works to fundraise and strategize for the organization.

“I think we are fundamental to the education of LGBTQ students in school,” he said. “We advocate for more comprehensive support at the local, national, and federal levels so our students are supported.”

Chavez is one of the students that was impacted by this work. He led his school’s GSA organization and worked with GLSEN throughout his youth. 

Cruz said Chavez is doing what he hopes today’s GLSEN students do in the future, which is pay the work forward. 

“There’s nothing more powerful than people who have experienced the work that GLSEN does and then coming back and allowing us to expand on that work with each generation that comes forward,” he said. 

Continue Reading

Florida

Homeless transgender woman murdered in Miami Beach

Andrea Doria Dos Passos attacked while she slept

Published

on

Andrea Dos Passos (Photo courtesy of Equality Florida)

Gregory Fitzgerald Gibert, 53, who was out on probation, is charged with the second-degree murder of 37-year-old Andrea Doria Dos Passos, a transgender Latina woman who was found deceased in front of the Miami Ballet company facility by a security guard this past week.

According to a Miami Beach Police spokesperson the security guard thought Dos Passos was sleeping in the entranceway around 6:45 a.m. on April 23 and when he went to wake her he discovered the blood and her injuries and alerted 911.

She was deceased from massive trauma to her face and head. According to Miami Beach police when video surveillance footage was reviewed, it showed Dos Passos lying down in the entranceway apparently asleep. WFOR reported: In the early morning hours, a man arrived, looked around, and spotted her. Police said the man was dressed in a black shirt, red shorts, and red shoes.

At one point, he walked away, picked up a metal pipe from the ground, and then returned. After looking around, he sat on a bench near Dos Passos. After a while, he got up and repeatedly hit her in the head and face while she was sleeping, according to police.

“The male is then seen standing over her, striking her, and then manipulating her body. The male then walks away and places the pipe inside a nearby trash can (the pipe was found and recovered in the same trash can),” according to the arrest report.

Police noted that in addition to trauma on her face and head, two wooden sticks were lodged in her nostrils and there was a puncture wound in her chest.

Victor Van Gilst, Dos Passos’s stepfather confirmed she was trans and experiencing homelessness. 

“She had no chance to defend herself whatsoever. I don’t know if this was a hate crime since she was transgender or if she had some sort of interaction with this person because he might have been homeless as well. The detective could not say if she was attacked because she was transgender,” said Van Gilst. 

“She has been struggling with mental health issues for a long time, going back to when she was in her early 20s. We did everything we could to help her. My wife is devastated. For her, this is like a nightmare that turned into reality. Andrea moved around a lot and even lived in California for a while. She was sadly homeless. I feel the system let her down. She was a good person,” he added.

Gregory Fitzgerald Gibert booking photo via CBS Miami.

The Miami Police Department arrested Gibert, collected his clothing, noting the red shorts were the same type in the video and had blood on them. Blood was also found on his shoes, according to police. He was taken into custody and charged. 

“The suspect has an extensive criminal record and reportedly was recently released from custody on probation for prior criminal charges. Police apprehended the suspect in the city of Miami and the investigation is currently ongoing. This case is further evidence that individuals need to be held accountable for prior violent crimes for the protection of the public. We offer our sincere condolences to the family and friends of the victim,” Miami Beach Mayor Steve Meiner said in a statement. 

Joe Saunders, senior political director with LGBTQ rights group Equality Florida, told the Miami Herald that “whenever a transgender person is murdered, especially when it is with such brutality, the question should be asked about whether or not this was a hate-motivated crime.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular