Roe gegen das US-Verteidigungsministerium

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

Roe gegen das US-Verteidigungsministerium ist eine von Lambda Legal und der Modern Military Association of America angestrengte Klage vor einem Bundesgericht gegen die diskriminierende Politik des Pentagons, die mit HIV lebende Militärangehörige daran hindert, an den meisten Standorten außerhalb der Vereinigten Staaten eingesetzt zu werden.

GLAD fungierte zusammen mit Kevin J. Minnick und Adam K. Lloyd als Rechtsbeistand bei einem von AIDS United, der American Public Health Association, der Duke Law Health Justice Clinic, der Southern AIDS Coalition, der National Alliance of State & Territorial AIDS Directors und NMAC eingereichten Amicus Curiae-Schriftsatz, in dem das Fortbestehen der HIV-bezogenen Stigmatisierung detailliert beschrieben wird und die Politik des Militärs unwissenschaftlich und ungerecht ist und sowohl die militärische Stärke als auch die öffentliche Gesundheit untergräbt.

Aus der Einleitung:

„HIV-bezogene Stigmatisierung und Diskriminierung werden durch tief verwurzelte Vorurteile gegenüber den Gruppen genährt, die überproportional von der Epidemie betroffen sind, darunter schwule Männer, Drogenkonsumenten und Farbige, sowie durch weit verbreitete Unwissenheit über die Art und das Risiko der HIV-Übertragung.“

„Der medizinische Fortschritt hat HIV zu einer chronischen, kontrollierbaren Erkrankung gemacht, die nicht mehr zu einer Invalidität führt. Dennoch besteht weiterhin ein HIV-bezogenes Stigma.“

"Der Freunde Ich möchte mit diesem Schriftsatz das Gericht auf die Geschichte und Erscheinungsformen der HIV-bezogenen Stigmatisierung und die stigmatisierende Wirkung der militärischen HIV-Politik aufmerksam machen, die sich nicht nur auf das Leben und die Karriere qualifizierter und patriotischer Militärangehöriger beschränkt. Die militärische HIV-Politik – einschließlich des hier vorgebrachten irrationalen Arguments der „Einsatzfähigkeit“ – spiegelt eine Stigmatisierung wider und erhält sie aufrecht, die auf überholten Vorstellungen von Prognose und Übertragungsrisiken beruht.“

"Der Freunde Ich fordere dieses Gericht auf, die einstweilige Verfügung des Bezirksgerichts zu bestätigen, um eine faire Behandlung sicherzustellen und die Durchsetzung einer unwissenschaftlichen Politik zu verhindern, die die öffentliche Gesundheit untergräbt.“

Der Blog

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

With the constant stream of hostile rhetoric coming from the President’s personal twitter account and press statements, it can be hard to know what to respond to and what not to grant the dignity of our attention.

But when the President of the United States uses racist comments to attack individual Americans, we have to speak out. Trump’s comments that four U.S. Congresswomen, all women of color, should “go back where they came from” draws on racist tropes that have been used to target communities of color throughout our history.

That includes my own family’s experience. My parents came to this country in the early 70s, speaking “broken” English with thick accents. I grew up watching them treated as second class, including being refused service or ignored in public because the other person couldn’t understand what my parents were saying. Like almost all Asian-Americans I know, I grew up being asked, and am still asked regularly, “Where are you from?” I still answer “Minnesota,” my birth state, even though I know that’s not the answer they are looking for. The idea of who is truly American, and who is from America, continues to have deep roots in racism and white supremacy.

That is why we still must call out the President’s language as racist and unacceptable, every single time. We cannot let it represent who we are as a country, but in order to do that, we must also change who we have been as a country, and our ideas about who is truly American.

We also cannot turn away from the fact that the attitudes behind that language don’t start or end with a tweet. While Trump doubles down on the insinuation that only certain people can truly be American, his administration’s immigration policies are causing daily harm to living, breathing people – children being pulled away from parents and individuals being caged in deplorable conditions at our border; threatened raids intended to terrify communities of color into invisibility; and cutting off pathways to asylum to vulnerable populations, in violation of U.S. and international law.

Immigrant rights are LGBTQ rights, and elevating racism and white supremacy damages us all. There are attacks on all of our communities coming from this administration, and our communities contain all of us. As we fight our own critical battles on multiple fronts, let us lift up one another and remember that it is inclusion, not exclusion, that makes us strong. One justice movement, embracing our differences, is how we will fight and how we will win.

Gleichstellungsorganisationen fordern den Obersten Gerichtshof auf, keine Ausgrenzung von LGBTQ-Arbeitnehmern vom Schutz vor Geschlechterdiskriminierung gemäß Titel VII zu erfinden

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

In a friend-of-the-court brief, GLAD, NCLR and other LGBTQ equality organizations make the case that rolling back the understanding that discrimination against LGBTQ workers is discrimination “because of sex” would create an unworkable rule for courts, employers, and employees alike:

Creating an exclusion where none exists in the statute is not a proper way to interpret Title VII—and it is one this Court has already repudiated in bringing consistency to Title VII’s application.

Brief of amici curiae GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, National Center for Lesbian Rights, Et Al

(Washington D.C., July 3, 2019) –GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), in partnership with Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, have filed a amicus curiae Schriftsatz supporting employees in three cases before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the application of Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender workers.

Filed on behalf of multiple LGBTQ equality organizations, the brief highlights the common sense understanding that LGBTQ status discrimination is discrimination because of sex, and details how courts have struggled in the past when forced to seek distinctions between evidence of discrimination relating to sexual orientation and evidence relating to sex. The only logical and workable outcome, the brief argues, is for the Court to affirm that:

Title VII prohibits all sex-based discrimination, including discrimination based on a person’s attraction to, or romantic interest in, people of the same sex, or an employer’s expectations about how men and women should look and behave,„

and that to do otherwise would:

„subject factually similar claims to arbitrarily inconsistent results and… exclude lesbian, gay and bisexual plaintiffs from protection based on facts that would be actionable… if brought by heterosexual plaintiffs.”

“There is simply no logical way to understand discrimination against a gay, lesbian or bisexual employee that does not relate to that person’s sex,” said Mary L. Bonauto, GLAD Civil Rights Project Director. “A straightforward reading of Title VII, along with existing Supreme Court precedent affirming prohibitions against sex stereotyping and same-sex harassment in the workplace point in only one direction – that lesbian, gay, and bisexual workers are protected under Title VII.”

In the case of transgender employees, for two decades courts have with near unanimity recognized the impossibility of understanding discrimination against transgender individuals as distinct from discrimination based on sex, and the brief urges the court not to discard the straightforward logic of those past rulings by attempting to draw an arbitrary line now that would only create confusion where it doesn’t exist:

The value of avoiding such arbitrary line-drawing is readily apparent from the Title VII claims brought by transgender plaintiffs, which, as the lower courts have generally appreciated, cannot be coherently disentangled from discrimination because of sex.

“The right to earn a living to support yourself and your family is essential, and no one should fear being fired because of who they are,” said Christopher F. Stoll, NCLR Senior Staff Attorney. “Courts and federal agencies have made clear for decades that discrimination against transgender employees is unlawful. To roll that back would not only upend the consensus understanding of Title VII, it would leave an already vulnerable population at risk for greater discrimination.”

The brief was submitted in three cases the Supreme Court will consider together on October 8, 2019: Altitude Express v. Zarda, Clayton County GA v. Bostock, Und Harris Funeral Homes v. Stephens.

In addition to GLAD and NCLR, organizations represented on the brief include Advocates for Youth, the Disciples LGBTQ+ Alliance, Equality Arizona, Equality California, Equality Federation, Equality North Carolina, Equality Ohio, Equality Utah, FORGE, Inc., Freedom for All Americans, Mazzoni Center, Movement Advancement Project, National Equality Action Team, the National Organization of Gay and Lesbian Scientists and Technical Professionals, Inc., One Colorado, Out & Equal Workplace Advocates, and Silver State Equality.

All amicus briefs filed in support of the employees will be available here.

Der Blog

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

At the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis, on the site where Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, stands a 13×26 foot sculpture, “Movement to Overcome.” Michael Pavlovsky’s work depicts a steep rock wall, with hundreds of human bodies scaling its sides. Some have their arms around the shoulder of another to keep them from falling, some are reaching for the next hold, and some are pointing the way forward. Almost every person is supporting someone else on their shoulders.

For me, there is no better representation of what movements look like.

That monument comes to mind as I reflect on the 50^th anniversary of the Stonewall Uprising. Like the figures in Pavlovsky’s sculpture, LGBTQ people today stand on the shoulders of those who fought back with bricks and heels on Christopher Street.

Looking around GLAD today, I see Stonewall’s legacy reflected in the gains for LGBTQ rights we and others have won. I see it fiercely resonating in the vision and actions of the people continuing the fight.

For many, Stonewall is embodied by Sylvia Rivera and Marsha P. Johnson, who with fellow freedom fighters – many who were trans women of color, drag queens, and others rejected by the rest of the community – refused to apologize for living their lives out and proud. GLAD’s Public Information Manager, J.D. Melendez, knew Sylvia when she supported a group of queer kids fighting for some space of their own in New York just before she died. He says of Sylvia and Marsha: “They not only showed us who we could be, but also, who we should be.”

Like the hundreds of figures in “Movement to Overcome,” we will never know the names of the vast majority of those on whose shoulders we stand. Pavlovsky designed his sculpture to represent, in his words, “the anonymous individuals that we know nothing about now that lived the civil rights struggle and participated in it.”

For five nights in June 1969, fed up with being mistreated, hundreds came to Christopher Street to fight and take care of each other. Those revolutionaries stood on the shoulders of pioneers who came before them. Across the nation, people inspired by Stonewall organized in their communities. That legacy grew into our modern LGBTQ movement.

Among many striving to carry on that legacy, I am grateful to be guided by the wisdom of those whose shoulders I stand on. When GLAD’s board president Joyce Kauffman came out in 1975, Stonewall was fresh. In her words: “It was scary to be out. It was brave to go into the streets and announce you were gay. To even say lesbian was revolutionary. It was a radical existence.” In that revolutionary spirit, Joyce became an attorney dedicated to helping LGBTQ people imagine, create and protect families of our own.

Like Pavlovsky’s figures pointing the way up, Stonewall is a symbol of hope in the U.S. and across the globe. GLAD’s Community Engagement Manager Qwin Mbabazi is an asylee and organizer from Uganda, “For many African LGBTQ movements,” Qwin says, “Stonewall is the epitome of HOPE. It’s like that small glimpse of light when all is going dark…[you] know that they won the great fight, and we can too.

We may be worlds apart from the time of Stonewall – and the incredible hope and resilience especially of LGBTQ youth won’t let the clock be turned back. Yet, too many Stonewall revolutionaries never saw the progress they propelled. And too many of the challenges we faced in 1969 remain. Police violence, youth homelessness, institutionalized discrimination still impact the most vulnerable among us.

I am reminded of Dr. King’s declaration of the Civil Right Movement’s moral imperative to address homelessness, joblessness, and poverty in the Black community. Our struggles to end racial injustice and to achieve LGBTQ equality are intertwined; our struggle doesn’t end until everyone in our community is free. Like the figures on that great rock wall, we must climb until we achieve true justice.

This Pride season, 50 years since Stonewall, should be one of both celebration and protest. As Sylvia said to J.D. just a week before she passed, “Keep fighting, my babies.”

Der Blog

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

Today, I am an out and proud lesbian, and I am prouder still to be the President of the GLAD Board. At the time of the Stonewall Riots 50 years ago, however, I had not yet come out. I was working alongside many others in the anti-racism and anti-war movements – but honestly, I was unaware of my own sexual orientation and I probably wouldn’t have believed you had you told me about my future self.

Then, in 1975, I came out, met my first girlfriend, and joined what was then called the Gay Liberation Movement.

Marching at Pride in 1977. That’s me in front of the banner.

It was scary to be out and it was an act of incredible bravery to go into the streets and announce you were queer. Being LGBTQ was to live a radical existence on the fringes of society. And participating in Pride was a revolutionary act.

Back then there were no protections for LGBTQ people. In fact, in many places, being LGBTQ was still criminalized. Which is exactly why, in the decade after Stonewall, GLAD was founded: to fight for the rights of LGBTQ people and ensure a better future.

GLAD has been on the forefront of the movement for LGBTQ rights ever since.

1970s and 1980s: Our first lawsuit was a response to a sting operation against gay men at the Boston Public Library. We challenged state sodomy laws around the country, sued to allow gay and lesbian couples to be foster parents, secured one of the first honorable discharges for a US servicemember targeted for being gay, and won the right of high school students everywhere to take a date of any gender to prom.
1990s: We won a lawsuit on behalf of members of Queer Nation who had staged a ‘Kiss In’ and were thrown out of a Boston bar. We won a groundbreaking second parent adoption case for a same-sex couple, and a censorship battle over a photo exhibit about gay and lesbian families entitled “Love Makes a Family.” We went all the way to the Supreme Court to ensure that people living with HIV and AIDS would be protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
2000s: We won the right of a transgender girl to wear girls’ clothing in school, and led the fight for marriage equality with court victories in Massachusetts and Connecticut. We won compensation from the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund for a woman who lost her partner on American Airlines flight 11, and filed the first multi-plaintiff legal challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
2010s: In just the past few years, we won the national Supreme Court case allowing same-sex couples to marry, and charged Walmart with a first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit challenging anti-gay discrimination. We successfully fought for a transgender woman to be rightfully transferred to a women’s prison from the men’s facility where she faced daily abuse – the first time that has happened as the result of a court order. And we are suing the Trump Administration for its discriminatory transgender military ban.

That’s just a small sampling of the fights we’ve taken on. And there is so much more to do.

We have spent 40 years transforming the law in order to transform LGBTQ lives. We’re not backing down now. And we need your help to keep moving forward.

It’s up to all of us to keep fighting. No matter what. No matter the opposition. 50 years after Stonewall, we must move forward with clear heads and open hearts.

That’s how GLAD has created a set of protections for LGBTQ people that was once unheard of. As the legal arm of a broad liberation movement, we’ve helped create the possibility for LGBTQ people to live the lives we deserve.

Along with the rest of the GLAD family, I am going to keep fighting. Keep resisting. Keep the flame of the LGBTQ revolution burning bright.

I hope you’ll join me.

In solidarity,

Joyce Kauffman
GLAD Board President

NCLR und GLAD reagieren auf die Aussagen von Präsident Trump zum Trans-Militärverbot

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

NCLR und GLAD reagieren auf die Aussagen von Präsident Trump zum Transgender-Militärverbot

Organisationen, die den juristischen Kampf gegen das Verbot des Militärdienstes für Transgender durch die Trump-Regierung anführen, haben als Reaktion auf die falschen Behauptungen von Präsident Trump, dass die Zulassung von Transgender-Personen zum Militärdienst übermäßig kostspielig wäre, die folgende Erklärung abgegeben:

Erklärung von Jennifer Levi, Direktorin des Transgender Rights Project bei GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD):

„Der Präsident könnte sich hinsichtlich der Kosten des Verbots nicht mehr irren. Aus rein finanzieller Sicht ist das Verbot von Transgender-Truppen viel teurer als weiterhin Transgender-Personen, die dieselben Standards erfüllen wie andere, den Dienst zu gestatten – so wie es das Militär für alle anderen Gruppen tut.“

Erklärung von Shannon Minter, Rechtsdirektorin des National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR):

„Es gibt einen Grund, warum die Öffentlichkeit lehnt dieses Verbot mit überwältigender Mehrheit abDie Entlassung hochqualifizierter Soldaten ist für die amerikanischen Steuerzahler kostspielig und schwächt unsere nationale Sicherheit.

„Der Ausschluss von Transgendern vom Militärdienst ist mit hohen Kosten verbunden, schwächt das Militär und untergräbt unsere nationale Sicherheit. Wie Militärexperten in einem Bericht 2018Das Verbot von Transgender-Truppen „erschöpft finanzielle Ressourcen aufgrund der Kosten für die Neubesetzung von Transgender-Personal“ und schließt ansonsten qualifizierte Rekruten aus, was das Militär dazu zwingt, mehr Geld für die Rekrutierung auszugeben, während alle Teilstreitkräfte bereits damit kämpfen, ihre Rekrutierungsziele zu erreichen. Laut einer Studie aus dem Jahr 2017 schätzen Laut Palm Center könnten die Kosten für die Neubesetzung der Transgender-Truppen bis zu 1496 Milliarden TP2 betragen.“

NCLR und GLAD stehen seit der Einreichung im Mittelpunkt des Rechtsstreits gegen das Transgender-Militärverbot von Trump und Pence Doe gegen Trump, der erste von vier gegen das Verbot eingereichten Fällen, am 9. August 2017.

Weitere Informationen zum rechtlichen Zeitplan und den aktuellen Entwicklungen in den Gerichtsverfahren gegen das Verbot finden Sie unter notransmilitaryban.org.

###

Durch strategische Prozessführung, politische Interessenvertretung und Aufklärung GLBTQ-Rechtsanwälte und -Verteidiger arbeitet in Neuengland und auf nationaler Ebene daran, eine gerechte Gesellschaft ohne Diskriminierung aufgrund von Geschlechtsidentität und -ausdruck, HIV-Status und sexueller Orientierung zu schaffen. www.GLAD.org

Das Nationale Zentrum für Lesbenrechte ist eine nationale Rechtsorganisation, die sich für die Förderung der Menschenrechte und Bürgerrechte der lesbischen, schwulen, bisexuellen und Transgender-Gemeinschaft durch Rechtsstreitigkeiten, politische Interessenvertretung und öffentliche Aufklärung einsetzt. www.NCLRights.org

Nachricht

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

GLAD stands in solidarity with the friends and family of Muhlaysia Booker, with her community in Texas, and with our entire transgender community, who are reeling from the news of yet another life taken by violence. Ms. Booker is the fourth identified Black transgender woman to be murdered in the U.S. already in 2019.

We have made progress toward transgender equality in recent years in many arenas, but attacks on the rights of transgender people are also escalating. And transgender people, and particularly transgender women of color, continue to be vulnerable to an epidemic of anti-transgender violence in this country.

We join together with all those who say we will not tolerate this continued devaluing of human life. We must work on every level, from the legal, to the political to the personal, to ensure these attacks are taken seriously by those tasked to address and prevent them, and to create a climate where respect, dignity, and safety are truly accessible to all, including and especially those most vulnerable in our communities.

GLAD Hails Historic Vote in the House of Representatives for Passage of the Federal Equality Act

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

The U.S. House today voted to pass the Equality Act, legislation that would enshrine explicit, comprehensive protections for all LGBTQ people, including in employment, housing, and public accommodations, in federal law.

Gary Buseck, Legal Director at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, issued the following statement:

Today’s vote marks another historic moment in our nation’s continuing journey toward ensuring equality and fair treatment for all Americans. Individuals, businesses, and political leaders across this country have come to understand that no one should be at risk for being denied a home, fired from a job, or excluded from access to fundamental services because of who they are or who they love.

It should be the highest aspiration of our nation to eliminate inequality, and ensure the fullest level of inclusion in public, civil and economic life for all Americans. The Equality Act, in conjunction with our other vital civil rights laws, furthers this project by providing clear and consistent protection from discrimination for LGBTQ Americans.

We especially thank lead House sponsor Representative David Cicilline (D-RI) and all the legislators who have joined as co-sponsors of the Equality Act, shepherded the bill through committee, and voted for its passage today. We urge the Senate to take up this important legislation to ensure our nation’s commitment to ending discrimination.

Der Blog

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

The leaders and activists of decades past bulldozed for us a path toward equality. Now, we need to fight for their absolute right to be treated with respect and dignity.

National Honor Our LGBT Elders Day is a day to celebrate the trailblazers in our movement. But it’s also a day to call attention to some of the challenges still facing our community as we age, and to shine a light on the vulnerable position LGBT seniors sometimes find themselves in when they require care.

Those who provide care for the aging are, as a whole, among the most compassionate and generous people, but often they lack the resources and education to provide appropriate and sensitive care to LGBT elders. But we are making progress toward that goal.

Programs such as the LGBT Aging Project at Fenway Health in Massachusetts, Getting it Right at Connecticut Community Care, and the nationwide SAGECare program have been on the ground providing cultural competency training to ensure that LGBT elders have access to safe and respectful care. In fact, it is now mandatory in Massachusetts for all state-funded or state-licensed elder service providers to be trained in LGBT cultural competency.

But we must remain vigilant. We continue to see situations where older LGBT adults relying on others for care must make an unconscionable choice between going back into the closet or suffering from discrimination and harassment.

GLAD recently helped resolve a case of discrimination in a long-term residential facility. A man was not being allowed to take his partner out for walks because they are a gay couple. The facility changed their discriminatory policy, but only after being threatened with litigation.

In another recent example of discrimination, a judge in Missouri incorrectly decided that federal anti-discrimination laws do not protect a married lesbian couple who were denied the protection of the Fair Housing Act when a senior housing community refused to allow them to move into their new home because of their sexual orientation. Our friends at the Nationales Zentrum für Lesbenrechte are appealing the decision.

We are hopeful that our federal lawmakers will soon pass the Equality Act to ensure that LGBT elders, along with everyone in our community, will have explicit protections from discrimination across the country. Meanwhile, we will continue to utilize the tools of litigation and legislation to fight for equality.

We are here to fight for LGBT elders. If you or someone you love is experiencing exclusion, harassment, or abuse because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, please contact GLAD-Antworten at 800-455-GLAD.

Chris Erchull is Staff Attorney at GLAD.

GLAD and NCLR Applaud States Supporting Transgender Servicemembers

Heim » National/Bundesweit » Page 36

New Jersey Governor Murphy joins the governors of California, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington in opposing Trump’s transgender military ban

Governor Phil Murphy announced today he will exercise every option available to allow transgender servicemembers to continue serving in the New Jersey Army National Guard. New Jersey joins California, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington as the sixth state to date to officially oppose the Trump Administration’s ban on transgender military service.

Attorneys at GLAD and NCLR, the organizations leading the legal fight to end the ban, issued the following statements:

“Governors have a responsibility to safeguard the strength and efficacy of their National Guard, and to ensure residents in their state are not subject to discrimination,” said Jennifer Levi, Transgender Rights Project Director at GLAD. “In opposing the Trump administration’s shameful policy, Governor Murphy along with the leaders of five other states to date are recognizing that excluding qualified transgender servicemembers weakens their state Guards and violates our nation’s bedrock principles of fairness and equal protection.”

“These courageous state leaders have seen this ban for what it is –baseless and cruel policy that serves no purpose other than to weaken our nation’s military and harm dedicated service members,” said Shannon Minter, Legal Director at NCLR. “Governor Murphy and others have said loud and clear that they refuse to discriminate against qualified individuals who seek only to serve their state and their country.”

A Recent Quinnipiac poll found that 70% of Americans agree that transgender individuals who meet military standards should be able to serve openly.

NCLR and GLAD have been at the center of the legal challenge to the Trump administration’s transgender military ban since filing Doe gegen Trump, on August 9, 2017, and securing the first of four preliminary injunctions that blocked the ban from taking effect for nearly two years. In both Damhirschkuh and a second case, Stockman gegen Trump, NCLR and GLAD continue to fight the discriminatory policy in the courts, pursuing a final ruling striking the ban.

Weitere Informationen finden Sie auf der Website von NCLR und GLAD, auf der die Geschichte und der Status des Transgender-Militärverbots von Trump und Pence beschrieben werden. https://notransmilitaryban.org/.

###

Das Nationale Zentrum für Lesbenrechte (NCLR) NCLR war die erste nationale LGBTQ-Rechtsorganisation, die von Frauen gegründet wurde. Sie engagiert sich seit langem für ethnische und wirtschaftliche Gerechtigkeit und für die Schwächsten unserer Gemeinschaft. Seit 1977 setzt sich NCLR durch wirkungsvolle Rechtsstreitigkeiten, öffentliche Politik und Aufklärung für die Bürger- und Menschenrechte von LGBTQ-Personen und ihren Familien ein. Vor Jahrzehnten startete NCLR das erste LGBTQ-Einwanderungsprojekt, das Transgender-Rechtsprojekt, das Jugendprojekt und das Seniorenrechtsprojekt und begann mit der heutigen Born Perfect-Kampagne, die Konversionstherapie zu beenden. www.nclrights.org