Der Blog

Making LGBTQ+ History

An LGBTQ+ History Month celebration of the historic work you make possible

Since our founding in 1978, GLAD has been at the forefront of the fight for equality. Through advocacy and litigation, we work to change the legal landscape for LGBTQ+ people and people living with HIV.

GLAD attorneys have argued three cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, each time making a difference felt across the country. As LGBTQ+ History Month comes to a close and a new Supreme Court session gets under way, we are celebrating our role in these cases and their lasting impact.

Three photos. The first of plaintiff Jim Obergefell and GLAD attorney Mary L. Bonauto speak to press outside of the U.S. Supreme Court. AIDS Law Project Director Bennett Klein outside the Supreme Court building following argument in Bragdon v. Abbott. And marchers with a large banner that says, Irish American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston.

The Right to Marry Throughout the Country

Obergefell gegen Hodges was a pivotal moment for LGBTQ+ rights. In a lawsuit challenging state bans on same-sex marriage, Civil Rights Project Director Mary L. Bonauto’s Supreme Court argument led to a 2015 ruling that affirmed marriage equality for same-sex couples nationwide. Since then, millions of couples across the country have been able to get married, knowing that no matter where they live or travel in the United States, the law will recognize their relationship.

Today, we are working to reaffirm this hard-won right and protect against threats from the current Supreme Court by passing the Respect for Marriage Act. Learn more and take action.

A Culture-Shifting Victory for People Living With HIV

Bragdon gegen Abbott, argued by GLAD Senior Attorney and AIDS Law Project Director Ben Klein, established that people with HIV are protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act. This culture-shifting moment was a critical victory for the push to end HIV-related discrimination in jobs, housing, and healthcare.

While we continue to defend the rights of people living with HIV, we are also passing legislation to expand access to PrEP – a safe and effective daily pill that reduces the risk of HIV transmission by close to 100%. PrEP is the most effective tool we have to prevent HIV transmission and bring an end to the HIV epidemic.

The First Openly Gay Attorney at the Supreme Court

In 1995, GLAD founder John Ward argued Hurley v. GLIB, becoming the first openly gay man to argue a case in the U.S. Supreme Court. While the court ruled against our argument defending the right of Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Group of Boston to march in Boston’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade, the case marked significant progress for visibility and acceptance of LGB people. GLAD’s leadership in this case helped set the stage for future victories.

We’re not done making history.

Each time we file a lawsuit or tackle an issue, we tear down more outdated laws and stereotypes that have denied our community basic protections and opportunities. Whether we’re affirming LGBTQ+ youth and older adults, fighting for transgender rights, ending discrimination against people living with HIV, or protecting LGBTQ+ families, GLAD is committed to equality.

As our community faces new challenges and right wing attacks on our rights across the country, we are not backing down. We remain steadfast in defending our gains and continuing to expand protections. We’re in this for the long haul, and we need you with us.

Your support makes that work possible. Please donate today to help us continue making an impact.

Donate now

Der Blog

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

In some states across the country, there have been censorship attempts that include banning books and laws that have gone as far as banning conversations in school about race, gender, LGBTQ+ identities, and disability. This Latin American Heritage Month, we are celebrating the creative contributions of authors of Latinx and Latin American descent that have had one of their books challenged or banned in classrooms or school libraries. We are excited to share a little bit about these individuals as we come to the end of Banned Books Week, and highlight their work.

Students and faculty alike are harmed by censoring information or passing legislation that prevents us from talking about our identities, families, and heritage. It also makes it impossible for us to honestly reckon with the United States’ history of exclusion. GLAD continues to fight these school censorship efforts, as we are doing in New Hampshire with our lawsuit Mejia et al. v. Edelblut et al. because everyone deserves to be included and empowered at school.

Carmen Maria Machado

In the Dream House

Carmen Maria Machado is an author, essayist, and critic who grew up in Allentown, Pennsylvania. She is most well-known for Her Body and Other Parties (2017). Her memoir, In the Dream House (2019), was awarded the 2020 Lambda Literary Award for LGBTQ Nonfiction, praised for Machado’s “brave baring of a painful experience and a reckoning with our collective failure to truly deal with queer intimate partner abuse.” This book appears on Central York School District’s list of banned books and has been challenged in many other states. Learn more about Carmen.

Gabby Rivera

Juliet Takes a Breath

Gabby Rivera was born in the Bronx and grew up in a religious evangelical household. She is well known for creating strong Latina characters, such as the queer Marvel superhero America Chavez and Juliet Milagros Palante, the title character in Juliet Takes a Breath. Juliet Takes a Breath is a coming-of-age story that grapples with coming out, intersectionality, feminism, and “the whole Puerto Rican lesbian thing.” Although this book has been widely praised, including by Roxane Gay who called it “fucking outstanding,” Forsyth County School District, Georgia, included it on its list of banned books citing that they can remove books that are “pervasively vulgar.” Learn more about Gabby.

Benjamin Alire Sáenz

Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe

Award-winning author Benjamin Alire Sáenz was born and raised in New Mexico. One of his most decorated novels, Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe is a coming-of-age story about two gay Mexican-American teenagers, their friendship, and their struggles with their identities. Although this book has been widely praised, and even named among Time Magazine’s 100 Best Young Adult Novels of All Time (alongside Catcher in the Rye, Little Women, Und To Kill a Mockingbird), has appeared on a list of proposed banned books by a Texas legislator. Learn more about Benjamin.

Adam Silvera

They Both Die at the End

Adam Silvera was born and raised in the South Bronx. His third novel They Both Die In the End features a gay Puerto Rican and a bisexual Cuban as main characters. Although it is widely acclaimed, has appeared on a list of proposed banned books by a Texas legislator. Learn more about Adam.

Ana Castillo

So Far from God

Ana Castillo was born in Chicago, IL. Castillo is known for her experimental style as a Latina novelist. Her book So Far from God addresses themes of rebellion, spirituality, and gender. While praised as a Chicana LGBT+ feminist book, it was banned by the Tucson Unified School District in Arizona. Learn more about Ana.

Gloria Anzaldúa

Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza

Gloria Anzaldúa was born in South Texas. She has contributed foundational texts of Chicana cultural theory, feminist theory, Latinx philosophy, and queer theory. Her semi-autobiographical book, Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza discusses her life growing up on the Mexico-Texas border, and was banned by the Tucson Unified School District in Arizona.

Aiden Thomas

Cemetery Boys

Aiden Thomas is a Latinx author of young adult novels. Their best-known work Cemetery Boys was a New York Times bestseller, winning numerous awards, including best of the year recognition from the American Library Association, Publishers Weekly, Barnes and Noble, NPR, and School Library Journal. Cemetery Boys follows the magical story of a transgender boy and his journey to be accepted by his traditional Latinx family and his community of brujos. This book has appeared on a list of proposed banned books by a Texas legislator. Learn more about Aiden.

Learn more about challenged and banned books from the American Library Association.

Banned Identities, Forbidden History: Challenging School Censorship Laws

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

Skip to video

Across the country, communities are facing escalating attempts to censor lessons on American history and race, silence classroom discussions of LGBTQ+ people and families, and ban LGBTQ+ books from school and public libraries. These efforts make it more difficult for teachers to educate and deprive students of essential support, information, and skills.

Watch this powerful conversation about the impacts these dangerous laws are already having on students and schools, and strategies for challenging these laws and advancing supportive policies. Together, we can protect public education’s important purpose: to provide all students with the skills, knowledge, and supportive environment they need to thrive in school.

Zu den Diskussionsteilnehmern gehören:

Nadine Smith, Executive Director at Equality Florida
Chris Erchull, Staff Attorney at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)
Nikole Parker, Director of Transgender Equality at Equality Florida
Tina Philibotte, Chief Equity Officer for the Manchester School District
Andres Mejia, Director of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice for the Exeter Region Cooperative School District
Alberto Cairo, journalist and parent of a transgender child in Florida public school

Moderated by Michael Johnson, Chief Legal Strategist at GLAD.

Tina Philibotte and Andres Mejia are also plaintiffs in GLAD’s lawsuit challenging New Hampshire’s school censorship law.

This event was hosted by GLAD, Gleichheit Florida, ACLU of NH, Und PFLAG.

Watch the video:

YouTube #!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=151#!trpen#Video#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

Ressourcen:

Free to Say Gay/Trans | Equality Florida
GLAD-Antworten | GLAD’s free, confidential legal infoline for New Englanders
Mejia v. Edelblut | GLAD lawsuit filed on behalf of panelists Tina Philibotte and Andres Mejia
Kennen Sie Ihre Rechte materials for students and educators | GLAD
Safe Schools for All | Information and resources from GLAD, GLSEN, NCLR, and PFLAG
Welcoming Schools | HRC
LGBTQ-inclusive curriculum materials | MA Commission on LGBTQ Youth
Cultivating Respect publication (en español) | PFLAG
2021 National School Climate Survey | GLSEN
Inclusive Curricular Standards Policies | GLSEN
Curriculum laws across the country | Movement Advancement Project
LGBTQ Youth Resources | CDC

News and Media:

I’m the father of a trans boy in Florida. ‘Don’t say gay’ is working as intended. | Washington Post Opinion by panelist Alberto Cairo
The People He Needs to Be Hurting: Understanding Ron DeSantis’s crusade against transgender care. | The Bulwark by panelist Alberto Cairo
Florida’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill Will Hurt Teens Like Me | New York Times Guest Opinion by Will Larken
Opponents Call It the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill. Here’s What It Says. | New York Times
The Anti-Trans Hate Machine, a podcast miniseries investigation into how anti-trans groups are organized and funded
Father sues Florida school district over LGBTQ pride flags in classroom | WFLA
What’s in the so-called Don’t Say Gay bill that could impact the whole country | NPR

If you have questions about your rights in New England, you can contact GLAD’s free, confidential legal infoline, GLAD-Antworten

Enjoyed the event? Join our email list and check our events page to find future conversations like this!

Der Blog

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

Earlier this year, we sued to stop a dangerous Alabama law that would criminalize parents who seek lifesaving healthcare for their transgender children, as well as doctors and other medical professionals who provide that care.

With our partners, we filed Reverend Eknes-Tucker v. Marshall on behalf of local families, medical providers, and the Pastor of a Birmingham church. In May, a federal judge stopped Alabama from enforcing the law while our lawsuit continues, enabling trans youth to continue to get the vital healthcare they need to thrive.

Now, as the 11th Circuit considers whether to continue blocking the law, more parents of transgender youth are sharing their stories with the court.

In their amicus curiae Schriftsatz, parents described the importance of being able to seek the best medical advice and care to support their children’s well-being, and how they have seen their children flourish with access to the right care.

Medical experts, faith groups, Und 21 U.S. states also filed briefs urging the Appeals Court to keep the bar on Alabama’s law in place.

Excerpts from the Parents’ brief:

When their children came out to them as transgender, each one of these parents was surprised, scared, and confused. Their very first step was to make sure their child knew that they would never stop loving and supporting them, and then they set out to determine what they needed to do to protect and ensure their child’s health and safety. This included seeking professional medical assistance to determine whether their child was, in fact, suffering from gender dysphoria and, if so, to devise a treatment plan.

Laura and Brian Coe, parents of 15-year-old Matthew (proceeding anonymously)

As much as Matthew has benefitted simply from being accepted and affirmed by his family, school, doctors, and friends, his medical transition is a critical measure for his well-being…Since obtaining the medical care that he needs, Laura and Brian have seen Matthew begin to “come to life.” The Coes would “worry for Matthew’s safety” if there were a disruption to his care. They are “simply trying to support their child and provide him with the best care possible.”

Melissa Soe, parent of 15-year-old Taylor (proceeding anonymously)

Since coming out and receiving care, Taylor has gone from “an anxious, sad kid who had a hard time getting up in the morning, to a kid who is up and out on their bike, in the woods, and going to camp.” Taylor is finally beginning to remind their parents of the happy-go-lucky kid they were when they were younger, prior to puberty taking its toll…” [It is] very important to Taylor to have continuity of care,” which would be disrupted by implementation of [SB 184]. Simply knowing that such care is accessible has significantly decreased Taylor’s distress.

Cynthia Lamar-Hart, parent of Gwendolyn who began receiving transition-related care while an adolescent living in Alabama and is now in her late 20s

Because access to care was not available in Alabama at the time, the family had to travel out-of-state:

[E]ven with the means to afford and make time for out-of-state treatment, Cynthia witnessed how … months of delays in Gwendolyn’s care resulted in suffering that she would not have experienced had she been able to visit a clinic in-state. Cynthia quickly saw a change in Gwendolyn after she began receiving transition-related care. Once Gwendolyn began the process of transitioning, she was no longer withdrawn, and became more confident and engaged socially and at school.

Joining these parents in asking the Court of Appeals to continue blocking enforcement of Alabama’s law are:

Scientists and clinicians with extensive expertise in the recognized standards of care for adolescents diagnosed with gender dysphoria. These seven scientists/clinicians have more than 57 years of clinical practice and have treated more than 2,100 transgender youth.

European, Australian, and New Zealand organizations with knowledge of the standards and availability of care in their respective countries. The organizations submitted their brief to provide the court with accurate information about the availability of gender-affirming healthcare in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, Australia, and New Zealand, confirming that, contrary to the state’s arguments, adolescents do have access to appropriate care in their countries.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Nursing, the American Medical Association, the American Pediatric Society, and 16 other national and state medical and health organizations. These professional medical and mental health organizations represent thousands of professional healthcare providers with expertise in providing care for youth, including transgender youth. They seek to ensure that all children and adolescents, including those with gender dysphoria, receive the optimal medical and mental healthcare they need and deserve.

Religious organizations including the Union for Reform Judaism, Central Conference of American Rabbis, and the Southeast Conference of The United Church of Christ.

21 U.S. states that have adopted policies protecting access to healthcare and prohibiting discrimination against transgender youth and adults.

Das Trevor-Projekt, the world’s largest suicide prevention and mental health organization for LGBTQ young people.

Find the briefs and other case documents are available on the case page. Oral argument is scheduled for the week of November 14, 2022, at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Montgomery, Alabama.

Nachricht

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

Legal Advocates Urge Supreme Court to Reject Effort Seeking Unprecedented Exemption from Anti-Discrimination Law

LGBTQ+ organizations’ friend-of-the-court brief warns the “free speech exemption” sought by petitioners in 303 Creative v. Elenis would undermine the bedrock protections that public accommodations laws have long provided against discrimination based on race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, transgender status and more in the marketplace

LGBTQ+ civil and legal rights advocates today reichte eine Stellungnahme als Amicus Curiae ein urging the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm long-standing precedent that preserves equal access to the commercial marketplace for all. They warned that granting the unprecedented “free speech exemption” sought by petitioners in 303 Creative v. Elenis would inevitably lead to increased discrimination based on the religious or other beliefs of the service provider, not only related to LGBTQ+ people or weddings, but across the population.

The brief, co-authored by GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), and White & Case LLP, and joined by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and the National LGBTQ Task Force, argues that the broad, unbounded exemption from Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act the petitioners seek would undermine the civil rights settlement achieved in the 1964 Civil Rights Act and numerous state laws that we all have access to goods and services from businesses who open themselves up to the public, notwithstanding personal views of the providers. This case threatens to disrupt that bedrock principle.

The brief chronicles the development of nondiscrimination laws in public accommodations, that is, public-facing businesses, to ensure we can all obtain what we need without being turned away for who we are. These laws have been enacted and enforced to realize our nation’s aspirations of full citizenship and equal participation in a free marketplace for everyone, with sellers and service providers free to express their views in other ways. To grant the far-reaching and unprecedented exemption the petitioners seek in this case risks turning us back towards a time when Irish, Jewish, Catholic, LGBTQ+, Asian or Black Americans, as well as women, LGBTQ+ people, people with disabilities, and people of many faiths were blatantly denied access to commercial businesses.

303 Creative v. Elenis was brought on behalf of a website development business seeking an exemption from state nondiscrimination law that would allow them to deny service to same-sex couples if the business decides to market wedding-related websites in the future. The petitioners are seeking a special exception to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which requires them, and all businesses, to provide their services equally without regard to specified characteristics.

As the organizations note in their brief, granting that exception would be a dangerous change to longstanding law. For decades, courts, including the Supreme Court, have rejected attempts to hollow out public accommodation laws by creating a right in public businesses to exclude customers based on their beliefs and views. Authorizing such an unprecedented exemption would contradict the long-understood agreement that such businesses remain open to all. Changing that rule will lead to more discrimination, more polarization, more group-based animosity and more people struggling to get the goods and services they need.

“Our public accommodation laws are a unifying force that respect the rights of every person to obtain the goods and services they need to live their lives. The proposed change would allow sellers to turn people away for who they are, and not only LGBTQ+ people. People shouldn’t have to call ahead to find out if a business serves people of their faith or other personal characteristics,” said Mary Bonauto, GLAD Civil Rights Project Director. “Exclusion and segregation in the public market harms all of us.”

“We hope the Supreme Court will reject this invitation to create a dangerous loophole in anti-discrimination laws,” said Shannon Minter, Legal Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. “We are one country, and ensuring that everyone has equal access to commercial goods and services plays an essential role in preventing social conflict and fragmentation.”

“This case is about the difference between the marketplace of ideas, and the marketplace for shopping,” Lambda Legal Acting Chief Legal Officer Jennifer C. Pizer said. “The business owner pushing this case has been fully free and effective in communicating her ideas about same-sex couples and marriage. Colorado’s law has not muzzled her. But, under decades of settled Supreme Court law, her free speech rights do not, and must not, authorize her to express her ideas by the conduct of rejecting customers when offering her services for sale to the general public. Civil rights laws are there to ensure that “open for business” means “open for business for everyone.”

Erfahren Sie mehr über den Fall

303 Creative v. Elenis

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

AKTUALISIEREN: On July 27, 2023, GLAD, National Center for LGBTQ Rights, American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, Human Rights Campaign, Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, and National Women’s Law Center released a FAQ on the Court’s decision and its potential impact on LGBTQ+ people and nondiscrimination protections.

June 30, 2023: In a 6-3 ruling the U.S. Supreme Court issued a highly fact-specific decision authorizing a narrow exception to a state nondiscrimination law for a website developer whose work it found involves selecting customers to convey the designer’s message. While the case allows for the first time a limited First Amendment exemption from laws requiring businesses open to the public to offer the goods and services they sell without discrimination, the unusual nature of the transaction in the case suggests the ruling has virtually no application to the overwhelming majority of businesses providing goods and services to the public. Mehr erfahren.

303 Creative v. Elenis was brought on behalf of a website development business seeking an exemption from state nondiscrimination law that would allow them to deny service to same-sex couples if they offer wedding websites in the future. The petitioners are seeking a special exception to Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act which requires them, and all businesses, to provide their services equally to everyone.

On August 19, 2022, GLAD co-authored a friend-of-the-court brief with Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Center for LGBTQ Rights (NCLR), and White & Case LLP, and joined by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and the National LGBTQ Task Force. The brief argues that the broad, unbounded exemption from Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act the petitioners seek would undermine bedrock protections provided by state and federal public accommodation laws for over a century.

Mehr erfahren.

Nachricht

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

Nadine Smith, Co-founder and Executive Director of Equality Florida to Receive GLAD Spirit of Justice Award

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) has announced that its 2022 Spirit of Justice Award will go to Nadine Smith. GLAD will present the award to Smith at its 23rd Annual Spirit of Justice Award Dinner on October 27, 2022 at the Boston Park Plaza. Those outside Massachusetts or otherwise unable to attend in person will also be able watch a livestream of the program online.

Honoree Nadine Smith is the co-founder and Executive Director of Florida’s statewide organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, Gleichheit Florida. TIME magazine named Smith to the 2022 TIME100, its annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.

A former award-winning journalist, Nadine has been a leading state and national human rights advocate, organizer, and LGBTQ equality champion for over three decades. She was on the founding board of the International Gay and Lesbian Youth Organization (IGLYO) and was one of four national co-chairs of the 1993 March on Washington. She currently serves on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Florida Advisory Committee.

Under Nadine’s leadership, Equality Florida has played a central role in every major LGBTQ rights issue in the state, from organizing against former adoption and marriage bans to advocating for nondiscrimination protections. As Florida has been in the national spotlight this year over dangerous anti-LGBTQ legislation, Nadine and Equality Florida have provided vital leadership once again. The organization ran a powerful advocacy campaign against the “Don’t Say Gay” school censorship and surveillance bill and are now challenging that law in federal court.

“For over three decades Nadine Smith has provided passionate advocacy and strategic leadership in the LGBTQ movement both in her home state and nationally,” said Janson Wu, GLAD Executive Director. “Florida has frequently been at the center of the struggle for LGBTQ equality, from fights over anti-discrimination laws and adoption bans, to the “Don’t Say Gay or Trans” law enacted this year. Nadine and Equality Florida are leading the fight against dangerous state laws aimed at erasing LGBTQ people and families in public schools. As we confront escalating anti-LGBTQ legislation and rhetoric and see our community increasingly targeted by those who want to restrict our freedoms, Nadine’s leadership at the eye of that storm in Florida truly epitomizes the Spirit of Justice. It’s an honor for GLAD to celebrate her inspirational life-long advocacy for human rights and LGBTQ equality with the 23rd annual Spirit of Justice Award.”

“At the most perilous times in history, our fight for full equality has always been buoyed by our commitment to locking arms and doing the work together,” said Nadine Smith. “It’s an honor to be recognized by GLAD this year and is a testament to the dedicated team of volunteers, colleagues, and supporters I have the privilege of working with at Equality Florida. Our state is again standing at the epicenter of a bigoted and extremist assault on LGBTQ people, fueled by a governor intent on building his political career on the backs of our community. But this fight is not simply Florida’s fight — it is a struggle to secure true equity, safeguard the progress we have made and protect our democracy from the onslaught. Our fight continues in earnest and it is a fight that needs all of us.”

Previous Spirit of Justice honorees include Kylar Broadus, Grace Sterling Stowell, Chai Feldblum, Jose Antonio Vargas, the Honorable Eric H. Holder Jr, Phill Wilson, Jennifer Finney Boylan, Urvashi Vaid, Margaret J. Marshall, Deval Patrick and his family; Reverend Irene Monroe; Bishop Gene Robinson; Beth Robinson, John Ward, Terrence McNally, Mandy Carter; Reverend William Sinkford, Tim Gill, Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon, Tony Kushner, Laurence Tribe, and Mary L. Bonauto.

Watch Nadine’s Acceptance Speech

About the Event

GLAD’s 23rd Annual Spirit of Justice Award Dinner was co-chaired by Ray Cheng and Jamie Bergeron and took place Thursday, October 27 at the Boston Park Plaza and virtually. More details, along with videos of more speakers from the event, are available at www.gladlaw.org/2022soj.

Nachricht

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Transgender People Are Protected Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

First-of-its-kind Appeals Court ruling says transgender people cannot be excluded from the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in public institutions—including carceral settings

RICHMOND, VA — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit today affirmed that transgender people who experience gender dysphoria are protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act. The ruling reverses a Virginia district court’s dismissal of claims brought by Kesha Williams, a transgender woman who was incarcerated in a men’s detention facility, denied access to medical treatment for her gender dysphoria, and faced persistent harassment by other inmates and prison deputies.

Multiple district courts have previously found that transgender people cannot be excluded from the protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Today’s decision is the first such ruling from a U.S. Court of Appeals.

A amicus curiae Schriftsatz co-authored by GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders and the National Center for Lesbian Rights presented scientific research and established case law to argue that the ADA prohibits discrimination based on gender dysphoria and requires that the treatment of people with disabilities must be based on “reasoned and medically sound judgments.” The brief argued that public institutions—including prisons—must provide equal access and make reasonable accommodations when entrenched policies and practices discriminate against a person because of their gender dysphoria.

The brief was joined by the American Civil Liberties Union, Black and Pink Massachusetts, Lambda Legal, National Center for Transgender Equality, National LGBTQ Task Force, Trans People of Color Coalition, Transcending Barriers, Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, disAbility Law Center of Virginia, and Disability Rights Vermont

“This is a huge win. There is no principled reason to exclude transgender people from our federal civil rights laws,” said Jennifer Levi, GLAD-Projektleiterin für Transgender-Rechte. “It’s incredibly significant for a federal appeals court to affirm that the protections in our federal disability rights laws extend to transgender people. It would turn disability law upside down to exclude someone from its protection because of having a stigmatized medical condition. This opinion goes a long way toward removing social and cultural barriers that keep people with treatable, but misunderstood, medical conditions from being able to thrive.”

“This is a thorough, well-reasoned opinion recognizing that the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against individuals with gender dysphoria,” said NCLR’s Legal Director Shannon Minter. “This decision sets a powerful precedent that will be important for other courts considering this critical issue.”

“The effort to exclude transgender people from their rightful protections under the ADA was always baseless and discriminatory,” said Joshua Block, Staff Attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, “and we’re thankful the Fourth Circuit affirmed that reality today. Transgender people are denied a multitude of reasonable rights and accommodations, particularly while incarcerated, and today’s ruling is a step forward for their fairness and equality.”

“We are very pleased with the outcome in the 4th Circuit decision,” commented Colleen Miller, Executive Director of the disAbility Law Center of Virginia, which also submitted a separate amicus curiae Schriftsatz, “and especially pleased that we were able to assist the Court through our amicus brief.”

Erfahren Sie mehr über den Fall

SFFA v. Harvard and SFFA v. University of North Carolina

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

SFFA v. Harvard and SFFA v. University of North Carolina

AKTUALISIEREN: On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court’s majority opinion ended the consideration of race as one of many factors for qualified students in college admissions. The opinion ignores the substantial factual record supporting the lawfulness of Harvard and University of North Carolina’s admissions programs and discounts present and past racial inequities the 14th Amendment to our constitution was intended to address. Read the full statement from GLAD Executive Director Janson Wu.

Universities must continue considering race as part of their holistic admissions process. A diverse learning environment prepares students to thrive in our diverse nation.

GLAD joined the National Women’s Law Center and 38 organizations in a friend-of-the-court filing in the U.S. Supreme Court cases Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard Und Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina. The two cases, which will be heard in October 2022, address whether universities can consider race as one factor in admissions decisions (also known as affirmative action).

As the brief explains, the inclusion of people of color is central to achieving the benefits of a diverse student body, including countering harmful stereotypes, fostering the exchange of ideas, and preparing students for a diverse society.

Learn more: Read the blog post from the National Women’s Law Center

The amicus was signed by:

American Medical Women’s Association
Athlete Ally
California Women Lawyers
Zentrum für reproduktive Rechte
Chicago Foundation for Women
Gleichberechtigung der Familie
GLBTQ-Rechtsanwälte und -Verteidiger (GLAD)
Menschenrechtskampagne
If/When/How: Lawyering for Reproductive Justice
KWH Law Center for Social Justice and Change
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.
League of Women Voters of the United States
Legal Aid at Work
Legal Momentum, the Women’s Legal Defense and Education Fund
Minority Veterans of America
NARAL Pro-Choice America
Nationaler Verband der Sozialarbeiter
National Association of Women Lawyers
Nationales Zentrum für LGBTQ-Rechte
National Coalition on Black Civic Participation
Nationale LGBTQ-Taskforce
National Organization for Women Foundation
National Women’s Law Center
Ohio Council of Churches
People For the American Way
Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.
Reproaction
Shriver Center on Poverty Law
Southern Poverty Law Center
Southwest Women’s Law Center
Tom Homann LGBTQ+ Law Association
The Center for Constitutional Rights
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
The Women’s Law Center of Maryland
Women Employed
Women Lawyers On Guard Inc.
Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York
Women’s Law Project

Nachricht

Heim » National/Federal » Page 18

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services this week released proposed regulations that will clarify and reaffirm that Section 1557, the nondiscrimination provision of the Affordable Care Act, protects LGBTQ+ people in access to healthcare services (i.e. receiving medical care in doctors’ offices, hospitals or other settings) and in health insurance. The proposal explicitly includes care related to gender transition and reproductive healthcare including abortion among medical care covered by the nondiscrimination provision.

The proposal would both reinstate and expand regulations issued under the Obama Administration clarifying that the prohibition against discrimination based on sex includes gender identity and sexual orientation. Former President Trump issued a subsequent interpretation of Section 1557 in June of 2020 attempting to deny protections for transgender and LGB people and adding broad religious exemptions. Following the Supreme Court Bostock ruling that same month affirming that prohibitions against sex discrimination include LGBTQ+ people, the Trump rule was blocked in federal court.

The Biden administration has pledged to issue regulations clarifying the implementation of Bostock across all federal agencies. This week’s HHS proposal accomplishes that in the critical domain of healthcare, where transgender and LGBQ+ people continue to face discrimination.

“While the Trump-era rule was always unlawful, it caused considerable confusion and concern among providers, insurers, and LGBTQ+ people,” sagte Jennifer Levi, Leiterin des GLAD Transgender Rights Project. “No one should ever be denied essential medical care because of bias. This proposed rule will provide clarity and will ensure people can access the healthcare they need.”

HHS will soon open a public comment period for the proposal. GLAD will work with LGBTQ+ partners to encourage comments in support of the updated rule.