News

Friend of the Court brief filed at Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court by several racial justice and LGBTQ advocacy groups argues exclusion of jurors based on race and being LGBTQ violated jurors’ rights and denied defendant a fair trial.

May 6, 2021 (BOSTON, MA) — Tomorrow the Supreme Judicial Court will hear a case with significant implications for how courts must approach discrimination in jury selection. Black and Pink MA, the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), and Lambda Legal filed a friend-of-the-court brief at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court supporting defendant-appellant Antwan Carter’s call for reversal of a 2010 murder conviction on the basis of improper discrimination in jury selection at his trial. The brief asserts that the trial court erred by failing to examine the prosecution’s peremptory strikes – exclusion of prospective jurors without reason – of four Black jurors and two jurors perceived to be LGBTQ, denying Carter access to an impartial jury of his peers and subjecting those individual jurors to impermissible discrimination. The amici organizations argue that peremptory jury strikes based on the presumed sexual orientation of the juror are prohibited under both the Massachusetts and Federal constitutions and that the trial court improperly relied on the inclusion of previously seated Black jurors to justify not examining the prosecution’s strikes of four other Black jurors. Oral argument in the case, Commonwealth v. Antwan Carter, is scheduled for May 7. “The criminal legal system has been failing black and queer people since its inception. Jury discrimination is one of several ways that the deck can be stacked against the accused.” said Michael Cox, executive director at Black and Pink Massachusetts. “We believe that’s what happened here, but we’ll never know because the trial judge failed to take the required steps.” “A fundamental premise of our justice system is that defendants in criminal cases have a right to a fair trial,” said Chris Erchull, Staff Attorney at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders. “Trial courts too often overlook instances of discrimination in jury selection, depriving defendants of a jury of their peers. When the court refused to question the prosecution’s strike of Black and LGBTQ jurors, Antwan Carter was denied a fair trial.” “Permitting discrimination in jury service against members of any historically marginalized group is contrary to the very idea of equal citizenship and repugnant to the State’s responsibility to ensure defendants access to a fair trial,” said Mary Bonauto, GLAD Civil Rights Project Director. “We hope the Supreme Judicial Court will re-affirm that racial and LGBTQ-status discrimination has no place in jury service or selection.” “This case bears a troubling record of disinterest in ensuring a jury selection process untainted by discrimination—denying the rights of full citizenship to Black jurors and jurors perceived to be LGBTQ based on their identities and denying the defendant’s right to a jury of his peers. Charles Hamilton Houston once said that ‘all our struggles must tie in together,’ and our coalition here illustrates a vital intersectional approach,” said Katy Naples-Mitchell, Staff Attorney at the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School. “The Supreme Judicial Court has an opportunity to build on its significant record of helping trial courts weed out discrimination from the Commonwealth’s courtrooms.” “Preventing Black and LGBTQ people from serving on juries violates their rights and the rights of a defendant to a fair trial by a jury of their peers. It also undermines the public confidence in the justice system, reflecting the long history of juror exclusion in this country. We hope the Court takes this opportunity to say that this discriminatory practice cannot continue. Black and LGBTQ people deserve equal treatment in the courtroom, especially when it comes to the criminal justice system,” said Ethan Rice, Senior Attorney of Fair Courts Project at Lambda Legal.

The mission of Black and Pink Massachusetts is to abolish the prison industrial complex and liberate LGBTQ+ people and people living with HIV/AIDS who are affected by that system through advocacy, support, and organizing. www.blackandpinkma.org

Through strategic litigation, public policy advocacy, and education, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders works in New England and nationally to create a just society free of discrimination based on gender identity and expression, HIV status, and sexual orientation. www.gladlaw.org

The Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School was launched in 2005 by Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., Jesse Climenko Professor of Law. The Institute honors and continues the unfinished work of Charles Hamilton Houston: to ensure that every member of our society enjoys equal access to the opportunities, responsibilities, and privileges of membership in the United States, through a community justice model. www.charleshamiltonhouston.org

Lambda Legal is a national organization committed to achieving full recognition of the civil rights of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, transgender people, and everyone living with HIV through impact litigation, education, and public policy work. www.lambdalegal.org

Commonwealth v. Carter

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

Exclusion of jurors based on race and being LGBTQ violated jurors’ rights and denied defendant a fair trial.

UPDATE – August 16, 2021: The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that LGBTQ people must be protected from discrimination in jury selection and reaffirmed that challenges to discriminatory strikes on the basis of race or any protected class must be addressed individually. Learn more and read the opinion here.

GLAD, together with Black and Pink Massachusetts, the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, and Lambda Legal filed a friend-of-the-court brief in Commonwealth v. Antwan Carter in support of defendant-appellant Antwan Carter’s call for reversal of a 2010 murder conviction on the basis of improper discrimination in jury selection at his trial.

The brief asserts that the trial court failed to examine the prosecution’s peremptory strikes – exclusion of prospective jurors without reason – of four Black jurors and two jurors perceived to be LGBTQ, denying Carter access to an impartial jury of his peers and subjecting those individual jurors to impermissible discrimination.

The organizations argue that peremptory jury strikes based on the presumed sexual orientation of the juror are prohibited under both the Massachusetts and Federal constitutions and that the trial court improperly relied on the inclusion of previously seated Black jurors to justify not examining the prosecution’s strikes of four other Black jurors.

Read the blog by GLAD Staff Attorney Chris Erchull.

Blog

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

Across the Commonwealth, children are left vulnerable because of outdated and discriminatory laws that fail to recognize their relationship to their parents.

Learn more directly from J, a parent who has been fighting for the full legal recognition of her relationship to her son for the last 11 years:

Contact your legislators today and tell them to protect children and families by co-sponsoring the Massachusetts Parentage Act.

The Massachusetts Parentage Act will affirm and protect our families, ensuring that all children can access the security of legal parentage.

Sign up for updates on the legislation by joining the Massachusetts Parentage Act Coalition, a coalition of families and community organizations working to update parentage in the state.

Together we can build support for this critical legislation. Our families can’t wait any longer for equal access to family protections. Love makes families, and we need our laws to protect them. It’s time to get the Massachusetts Parentage Act passed this session!

Sign up for updates and action alerts to help pass the Massachusetts Parentage Act. If your family has experience with the state’s outdated parentage laws, share your story below and help build support for this essential legislation.

Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence v. Boston School Committee

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

School Diversity During the COVID-19 Pandemic

UPDATE: July 15, 2021 – After a five-hour community hearing, the Boston School Committee voted unanimously to implement the new admissions plan, which will be a more equitable process and ensure greater diversity. Read more.

GLAD has signed onto an amicus brief in support of the Defendants in Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corp., v. The School Committee of the City of Boston. Read the brief here.

April 15, 2021 – Judge Young ruled 4/15 to uphold the admissions plan. Read the ruling here.

April 5, 2021 BOSTON – International law firm Brown Rudnick LLP, Massachusetts Law Reform Institute (“MLRI”), LatinoJustice PRLDEF (“LatinoJustice”), and the Children’s Law Center of Massachusetts (“CLCM”) filed an amicus brief in support of the School Committee of the City of Boston (the “School Committee”) as it defends its Boston Exam Schools admissions plan for the 2021-22 school year. The School Committee developed the plan in response to the COVID-19 pandemic while seeking to improve racial, socioeconomic, and geographic diversity in the schools and to raise the quality of education for students throughout the city of Boston.

The amicus brief, which has been joined by 23 prominent national and local organizations (listed below), addresses admissions to the three Boston Exam Schools: the Boston Latin School, the Boston Latin Academy, and the John D. O’Bryant School of Mathematics and Science. The elite Boston Exam Schools (the “Schools”) are among the highest ranked public schools in the nation. The Schools are renowned for their academic rigor and excellence, superior resources, and higher rates of graduation and attendance at four-year colleges as compared to other Boston Public Schools. As a result, every seat is highly coveted. Each school accepts students for grades 7 and 9, and accepted students stay on through the completion of high school. Historically, the Schools have disproportionately enrolled students from Boston’s high-income neighborhoods. As a result, low-income students, who are predominantly Black and Latinx, have been consistently underrepresented at the Schools.

To make way for a more socioeconomically diverse student body, the Boston School Committee put forward a new plan with two changes to the Exam Schools admissions criteria for the 2021-22 academic year. First, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the plan eliminated an entrance exam. Second, the plan allocated 20% of seats based solely on GPA and the remaining 80% of seats allocated based on a combination of the student’s GPA and home ZIP code, with each ZIP code receiving seats based on the percentage of school-aged children living in that ZIP code. ZIP codes are ranked by median income for a family with school-age children, and then 10% of each ZIP code’s available seats are filled in order of students’ GPAs, beginning with the lowest median income ZIP code. The School Committee projects that the plan will increase the number of students admitted from Boston’s lowest-income neighborhoods thereby improving racial and socioeconomic diversity and creating more opportunities for students from underrepresented communities.

The Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corporation, which consists of a group of parents of students from high-income ZIP codes expected to lose seats under the plan, challenged the plan in a lawsuit filed against the School Committee. The suit seeks to prohibit the use of ZIP codes as a factor in admissions. The coalition argues that ZIP codes are being used as a proxy for race, rendering the plan unconstitutional.

In response to the Boston Parent Coalition suit, Brown Rudnick’s amicus brief notes that while the School Committee properly considered the past and present racial and socioeconomic discrimination that historically has created racially segregated neighborhoods across the City, today Boston is incredibly diverse within and across its ZIP codes, and the Admissions Plan did not use ZIP codes as a proxy for race.

The brief states that the School Committee’s new plan addresses the legitimate government interests of expanding access to quality education for children from low-income homes and of promoting socioeconomic diversity as an academic benefit to all students. The brief also highlights the plan’s compelling pedagogical goals of promoting the educational benefits of a diverse student body to diminish racial isolation and to ensure that segregated housing patterns do not limit opportunities for low-income students of color, as well as the compelling interest of addressing past discrimination.

“The Massachusetts Law Reform Institute proudly joins with Brown Rudnick, LatinoJustice, and the Children’s Law Center of Massachusetts to support the Boston School Committee’s Exam School Admissions Plan,” said Virginia Benzan, Director of MLRI’s Race Equity & Justice Project. “Education can change the trajectory of a child’s life and we know that access to a quality education is an effective tool to ending poverty. The policy put forward by the School Committee shows that the City’s commitment to promoting socioeconomic, racial, and geographical diversity is more than just words but is followed with action. This policy is the right step to achieving educational equality and MLRI is honored to lend our voice in support of it.”

“All Boston students should have a fair opportunity to attend Boston’s most prestigious schools, regardless of their socioeconomic status or race. For too long, economically disadvantaged students, and consequently, students of color, have been underrepresented at the three Boston Exam Schools. The proposed Admissions Plan appropriately seeks to ensure that the diversity of the Boston Exam Schools more accurately reflects the diversity of Boston,” said Brian Alosco, Brown Rudnick Associate in the Litigation & Arbitration Practice Group, who is leading a team of attorneys on a pro bono basis serving as co-counsel on the amicus brief.

“Latinx and other students of color living in Boston’s segregated low-income neighborhoods deserve an equal opportunity to attend the city’s elite high schools. We are pleased that our amicus brief squarely puts before the court Boston’s long history of segregation and exclusion, which inextricably linked neighborhoods of color with lower socioeconomic households from which too many Latinx, Black, and other students of color hail,” said José Pérez, Deputy General Counsel of LatinoJustice PRLDEF.

“The Admissions Plan recognizes the transformational power of a high-quality education for students from economically disadvantaged households, students experiencing homelessness, and students who are involved in the child welfare system. CLCM firmly supports the Admissions Plan with the hope that it will produce a more equitable admissions process, especially in light of the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on disadvantaged communities,” says Stephanie Rodriguez-Ruiz, one of the attorneys representing CLCM.

About Brown Rudnick LLP

Brown Rudnick combines ingenuity with experience to achieve great outcomes for our clients. We deliver partner-driven services, with a focus on collaboration in the client’s best interest. Brown Rudnick is an international law firm, serving clients around the globe. With more than 250 lawyers and government relations professionals, the Firm has offices in key financial centers across the United States and Europe. We are recognized for our market-leading practices covering several targeted industries, including bankruptcy and corporate restructuring, life sciences, technology, litigation and arbitration, white-collar defense and government investigations, special situations, corporate finance, strategic capital, distressed debt, intellectual property, real estate, M&A, and cross-border deals and disputes.
Brown Rudnick is deeply committed to public service. Pro bono work is an integral part of our culture. Our lawyers, paralegals, and professional staff dedicate their time and talents to help individuals and organizations pursue civil rights and racial justice and in other matters.

About Massachusetts Law Reform Institute

The Massachusetts Law Reform Institute (“MLRI”) is a statewide nonprofit anti-poverty law and poverty center whose support center for civil legal aid organizations in Massachusetts. MLRI’s mission is to advance economic, social, and racial justice for low-income persons and communities. MLRI works to address public and institutional policies and procedures that either contribute to, or perpetuate, the cycle of poverty; ensure that low-income and underserved populations across the state are provided the same legal protections, rights and liberties enjoyed by all members of society; provide local legal services providers and community-based advocacy organizations that serve low-income people with the substantive expertise, and dismantle systems that thwart the advancement and inclusion of Asian, Black, Latino, and Native American low-income people.

About LatinoJustice PRLDEF

LatinoJustice PRLDEF (“LatinoJustice”) works to create a more just society by using and challenging the rule of law to secure transformative, equitable and accessible justice, by fostering leadership through advocacy and education, and by empowering the Pan-Latinx community in the areas of education, voting rights, immigrant rights, economic justice, and criminal justice reform. Since its inception nearly five decades ago, LatinoJustice has championed the rights of low-income students, particularly Latinx students, to receive a high-quality education.

About Children’s Law Center of Massachusetts

The Children’s Law Center of Massachusetts (“CLCM”) is a nonprofit legal aid organization founded in 1977. Its mission is to promote and secure equal justice and to maximize opportunity for low-income and systems-involved children and youth by providing quality, culturally sensitive, advocacy, and legal services. CLCM provides comprehensive legal representation and related assistance to public school students in a range of education matters, including special education, enrollment, and school discipline matters, while also advocating for systemic policy change on the district and state levels.

List of Amici Curiae

Massachusetts Law Reform Institute
LatinoJustice PLRDEF
Children’s Law Center of Massachusetts
American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts
Autism Sprinter
Center for Law and Education
Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race & Justice at Harvard Law School
Citizens for Public Schools
EdVestors
GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)
Greater Boston Association of Black Social Workers
Harvard Legal Aid Bureau
Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU)
Hispanic Federation
Jamaica Plain Progressives
Mass Insight Education & Research
Massachusetts Advocates for Children
Massachusetts Appleseed Center for Law and Justice
Northeastern University School of Law, Center for Health Policy and Law
Progressive West Roxbury/Roslindale
Quality Education for Every Student (QUEST)
Roslindale is for Everyone (RISE)
VISIONS, Inc.

COVID-19 Vaccine Forum for the Trans, Nonbinary, and Gender Expansive Community

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

Transgender, nonbinary, and gender expansive community members are often denied care and experience an overall lack of access to information, resources, and support.

Join GLAD, the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition, and members of the MA Trans Health Coalition for a free virtual information session on the COVID-19 vaccine. In this information session, learn from medical experts and get answers to your questions about the safety, availability, and rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Featuring:

Dr. Carl Streed – Research Lead for BMC’s Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery
Pam Klein, RN, MSN – Manager, BHCHP Transgender Program
Dr. Will Giordano-Perez – Physician Consultant for the Rhode Island Dept. of Health COVID-19 Vaccine Advisory Committee

Moderated by Tre’Andre Valentine, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition

Register for free by clicking here.

ASL interpretation and live captioning will be provided. If you have questions, please email Qwin Mbabazi at qmbabazi@glad.org.

GLAD Statement in Support of #DecrimMA

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

GLAD Executive Director Janson Wu issued the following statement:

“As an organization advocating for the wellbeing, agency, and autonomy of LGBTQ people, GLAD supports #DecrimMA and joins the call for full decriminalization of consensual sex work. LGBTQ people face disproportionate harassment from police, and violence and mistreatment when incarcerated. The criminalization of consensual sex work can lead to increased police interaction whether an individual is engaged in sex work or simply perceived to be. Transphobia and homophobia still lead to family rejection, homelessness, and poverty for too many LGBTQ people, and criminalizing what can be a critical survival option for some only compounds those harms. Criminalization forces many to work in hidden or remote places where they are more vulnerable to violence. It also impedes sex workers’ ability to negotiate condom use and safer sex practices, to seek help when they are targets of violence or harassment, or to set boundaries for their autonomy, health, and protection. Research also shows that criminalizing consensual sex work subverts efforts to protect individuals from trafficking, exploitation, and abuse by making it dangerous for victims to speak out. Decriminalizing consensual sex work is the safer, healthier, and more humane path for Massachusetts.”

Learn more about #DecrimMA.

Decriminalize Consensual Sex Work in Massachusetts

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

Decriminalizing consensual sex work is the safer, healthier, and more humane path for Massachusetts.

As an organization advocating for the wellbeing, agency, and autonomy of LGBTQ+ people, GLAD supports An Act to Promote the Health and Safety of People in the Sex Trade (H.1867) to fully decriminalize consensual sex work.

LGBTQ people face disproportionate harassment from police, and violence and mistreatment when incarcerated. The criminalization of consensual sex work can lead to increased police interaction whether an individual is engaged in sex work or simply perceived to be.

Transphobia and homophobia still lead to family rejection, homelessness, and poverty for too many LGBTQ people, and criminalizing what can be a critical survival option for some only compounds those harms. Criminalization forces many to work in hidden or remote places where they are more vulnerable to violence.

It also impedes sex workers’ ability to negotiate condom use and safer sex practices, to seek help when they are targets of violence or harassment, or to set boundaries for their autonomy, health, and protection. Research also shows that criminalizing consensual sex work subverts efforts to protect individuals from trafficking, exploitation, and abuse by making it dangerous for victims to speak out.

Read GLAD’s testimony from December 14, 2021.

For more information about how to support the bill, visit Black & Pink Massachusetts’ Advocacy Toolkit.

Blog

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

Families today are built in a variety of wonderful ways, and all children should have access to the security of legal parentage. However, Massachusetts law is decades out of date and does not reflect the rich diversity of families in the Commonwealth.

On February 11, 2021, the Massachusetts Parentage Act Coalition held a live conversation with parents, advocates, legal experts, and legislators about the urgent need to pass the Massachusetts Parentage Act this session. Watch the event and visit the resources below to learn more about the bill and how you can help create pathways to parentage for every child in Massachusetts!

Panelists:

State Representative Kay Khan
Patience Crozier, Senior Staff Attorney, GLAD
Dean Hutchison, Vice President of Legal Services, Circle Surrogacy & Egg Donation; Chair of ABA Committee on ART
Doug NeJaime Professors of Law, Yale Law School
J. Shia, Parent

Moderated by Kate Weldon LeBlanc, Executive Director, Resolve New England.

RESOURCES

Do you have experience with MA’s outdated and discriminatory parentage laws?
Share your story and help build support for the Massachusetts Parentage Act!

Webinar: Protecting Children with the MA Parentage Act

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

Families today are built in a variety of wonderful ways, and ALL children should have access to the security of legal parentage. However, Massachusetts law is decades out of date and does not reflect the rich diversity of families in the Commonwealth. Join parents, advocates, legal experts, and legislators for an interactive conversation about the urgent need to create pathways to parentage for every child in Massachusetts and how we can get there together.

Live captioning will be provided.

Our speakers include:

MA State Representative Kay Khan Patience Crozier, Senior Staff Attorney, GLAD Dean Hutchison, Vice President of Legal Services, Circle Surrogacy & Egg Donation; Chair of ABA Committee on ART Kate Weldon LeBlanc, Executive Director, Resolve New England Doug NeJaime Professors of Law, Yale Law School J. Shia, Parent Moderated by Kate Weldon LeBlanc, Executive Director, Resolve New England

RSVP here:

Read more about the Massachusetts Parentage Act at massparentage.com.

Blog

Home » Massachusetts » Page 16

Governor Baker has vetoed an important public health and safety measure to slow the spread of COVID-19 in prisons. This measure was included in the Massachusetts budget, and would create safe and reasonable steps to release people in prison who are most vulnerable.

Since October 1, over 1,000 incarcerated people have contracted the virus and a growing number are hospitalized. Following the lead of public health experts, including the National Academy of Science and the American Public Health Association, our Legislature passed critical decarceration measures in the budget (line item 8900-0001) via Senate Amendment 325, sponsored by Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz, recognizing the current urgency for action.

Please contact your legislators today and ask them to save lives now in our prisons and jails and restore line item 8900-0001 of the budget.

Although we are relieved that prisoners are among those in the first phase of vaccine distribution, it will be months before any vaccine is administered to all those incarcerated, and even longer before infection in prisons is controlled. Failing to act now means intolerable harm and further deaths.

We join Prisoner Legal Services, Black and Pink MA and other community partners in asking you to call, email, tweet, or post on Facebook now.

We are pleased that another priority of GLAD’s stayed in the budget: the data collection bill that increases transparency for LGBTQ people subjected to solitary confinement. But the safety of all people who are currently incarcerated, as well as their loved ones, is at stake right now. This is an important moment for the Commonwealth – and we need you to join us in taking action today.

PLEASE CONTACT:

Your State Senator and Representative
Click here to find their contact information

Speaker Robert DeLeo
Phone: (617) 722-2500
Email: Robert.DeLeo@mahouse.gov
Twitter: @SpeakerDeLeo

Senate President Karen Spilka
Phone: (617) 722-1500
Email: Karen.Spilka@masenate.gov
Twitter: @KarenSpilka

Thank you for taking action!