News

In a post for them., GLAD Transgender Rights Project Director Jennifer Levi and the National Center for Lesbian Rights’ Legal Director Shannon Minter wrote about what’s next after the news of Justice Kennedy’s retirement from the United States Supreme Court — and how our communities can respond.

Justice Kennedy’s departure from the Court is devastating, but it does not mean the end of our work — far from it. It does mean that we have to be more creative, dedicated, disciplined, and hardworking than ever before to make and sustain change. And we have to keep our eyes on the long view, while we fight against Trump administration policies that are devastating our communities right now.

Read the full article here.

Statement of Executive Director Janson Wu on Supreme Court Upholding President Trump’s Muslim Travel Ban

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

Today’s Supreme Court ruling upholding President Trump’s shameful Muslim ban is an affront to our core values of justice, inclusivity, and generosity.

The Trump administration’s cruel and xenophobic policies, from targeting Muslims to separating and detaining families at our border, harm particularly vulnerable communities, including refugees and asylum seekers.

Such policies do not make America “stronger” but seek to divide us, and we refuse to be divided.

We are a nation of immigrants, and of diverse beliefs and backgrounds – and we are stronger because of that. GLAD remains in solidarity with all immigrants and refugees and will continue to fight for justice for all of us.

Take Action:

Today in DC: Rally at 11:45am ET at the Supreme Court

This Saturday in Boston, and across the nation, show up to support immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers.

Find a Saturday event near you.

NCLR and GLAD Filing Argues the Court Should Permanently Stop the Trump-Pence Ban Now

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) today filed their reply in support of their Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment in Doe v. Trump—the first lawsuit filed to stop the Trump-Pence transgender military ban. If Judge Kollar-Kotelly rules in favor of the plaintiffs, that decision would permanently block the Trump-Pence transgender military ban from ever taking effect. Today’s filing rebuts the administration’s attempt to “blinker reality and recast the Mattis Plan as something other than what it plainly is: a blueprint to ensure that no transgender individuals serve in our Nation’s Armed Forces ‘in any capacity.’” The plaintiffs’ reply is the last in a series of filings that must occur before Judge Kollar-Kotelly determines whether she can issue a permanent ruling blocking the ban.

The Doe plaintiffs argue that the Trump-Pence transgender military ban singles out transgender Americans—putting them into a solitary class and subjecting them to different standards than every other servicemember—on no legitimate basis. And because policies that discriminate against transgender people require heightened scrutiny by the court, plaintiffs argue that the Trump administration cannot scramble to invent reasoning now, after the ban has been issued, in an attempt to justify the ban during litigation.

“There is no legitimate justification for barring transgender people from military service based on who they are, rather than their ability to do the job. The government cannot make up reasons after the fact to justify a policy that is based on prejudice, not genuine military concerns,” said Shannon Minter, NCLR Legal Director.

“This filing brings us one step closer to a final resolution of this case. Transgender servicemembers have continued to put their lives on the line for this country while having to defend themselves from attack from this administration. They deserve honor and respect, not discharge papers,” said Jennifer Levi, GLAD Transgender Rights Project Director.

BACKGROUND

June 30, 2016: The United States Department of Defense (DOD) adopted a policy permitting transgender people to serve in the military based on a nearly two year DOD review determining that there was no valid reason to exclude qualified personnel from military service simply because they are transgender.

July 26, 2017: President Trump tweeted that “the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military.”

August 9, 2017: NCLR and GLAD filed Doe v. Trump, the first lawsuit filed to stop the ban, challenging its constitutionality and requesting that the court issue a nationwide preliminary injunction to stop it from taking effect while the case is being heard in court.

August 25, 2017: President Trump issued a memorandum ordering Secretary of Defense James Mattis to submit “a plan for implementing” the ban by February 21, 2018. Secretary Mattis delivered this (the “Mattis Plan” and panel report) to President Trump on February 22, 2018.

October 30, 2017: The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Doe v. Trump plaintiffs had established a likelihood of success on their claim that President Trump’s ban violates equal protection, that plaintiffs would be irreparably harmed without a preliminary injunction to stop the ban, and that the public interest and balance of hardships weighed in favor of granting injunctive relief and temporarily halting the ban while the case is heard by the court.

March 23, 2018: President Trump accepts the “Mattis Plan” and issues a memorandum in which he “revoked” his August 25 Memorandum.

April 20, 2018: Defendants file a motion to dissolve the October 30 nationwide preliminary injunction enjoining the transgender military ban issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia; a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint; and a Motion for Summary Judgment.

May 11, 2018: Plaintiffs file their cross-motion for summary judgment, as well as motions in opposition to Defendant’s motions to dissolve the injunction and dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint.

NCLR and GLAD have been at the center of the legal fight challenging the Trump-Pence transgender military ban since filing Doe v. Trump, the first of four cases filed against the ban, on August 9, 2017.

###

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.GLAD.org

The National Center for Lesbian Rights is a national legal organization committed to advancing the human and civil rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education. www.NCLRights.org

Blog

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

In the weeks before his assassination in 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King said in a speech to a group of sanitation workers in Memphis:

Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know now that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t have enough money to buy a hamburger?

The sanitation workers were striking in protest against unsafe work conditions and unequal pay. At the time of their marches, King had envisioned a campaign – the Poor People’s Campaign – to lift up economic justice in the civil rights movement. He saw that equality and equity – access to jobs and fair wages, a safe work environment, healthcare, education – were inextricably linked to achieving freedom, and aligned with the sanitation workers’ struggle for basic human rights.

This, one of his last actions for justice, is our call to finish his work.

The Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival, is a 40-day, inclusive, cross-movement campaign reigniting King’s work to challenge racism, poverty, ecological devastation, and the war economy. Reverend William Barber is the driving force behind the campaign and calls on each of us to join the movement and finish what King started. Every Monday through June 23, organizers are hosting a Day of Action in state capitals across the country where you can voice your demands for a fairer and more just society for all. To find an event near you and join the movement, visit the Poor People’s Campaign website.

For GLAD, reigniting the work means remaining committed to racial and economic justice in tandem with our fight for LGBTQ equality. As we dismantle discriminatory laws and pass groundbreaking inclusive and affirming policies, we recognize that our work does not and cannot end there. We must also challenge deep racial and economic disparities among our communities so that equality and equity extend to everyone.

We’ve made incredible progress toward equality for LGBTQ people and people living with HIV, from winning the freedom to marry to ensuring people living with HIV are protected from discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act to updating family laws that reflect the beautiful diversity of today’s families.

Yet even in a state like Massachusetts, where GLAD is headquartered and where we have made huge gains toward equality, not everyone in our communities is being lifted up equally by our victories.

A recent report by the Fenway Institute and Boston Indicators provides a snapshot of the health of the Massachusetts LGBTQ community, and reveals some of the racial and economic disparities our ongoing work must confront.

For example, a disproportionate number of LGBTQ people across the state live in poverty, with transgender people experiencing even higher rates of poverty. Additionally, a disproportionate number of LGBTQ youth who are homeless are youth of color. Stigma and bias, and non-affirming or unwelcoming family environments are some contributing factors for increased rates of poverty and homelessness among the LGBTQ community and communities of color. We know from other research that these trends are playing out across the country.

striking-sanitation-workers-i-am-a-man — An exhibition at the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis portrays the sanitation workers’ strike in 1968.

This report isn’t just about numbers and percentages. It’s about real people who are bravely speaking out, being visible, and demanding to be counted. Theirs are the human faces behind the issues, and like the Memphis sanitation workers, who wore signs as they marched that said, “I Am A Man,” they remind us why we’re fighting for justice.

Their experiences tell us that we have so much more to accomplish to ensure everyone in our communities, especially our most vulnerable – communities of color, LGBTQ elders, people living with HIV, transgender youth who are homeless or out of home – has equal access to the basic human rights we all need and deserve: jobs, fair wages, healthcare, education, and a place to call home.

If we are to be successful in our fight for equality and equity, the LGBTQ movement must confront the range of experiences and disparities within our own communities. Our movement is stronger when we embrace the intersections and the commonality in our social justice struggles, and the power in our diversity. At the end of the day, it’s our shared humanity that grounds us as one justice movement.

To learn more about the Poor People’s Campaign, and to find an event near you, visit www.poorpeoplescampaign.org.

Blog

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

We’ve always known the government has no military justification for the Trump-Pence transgender service ban. The government’s plan for ridding the military of transgender people is based on discrimination. Plain and simple.

And now we have the government’s own documents that show it.

Key documents received from the government literally show a straight line between Trump’s tweets last July and the recently announced implementation plan.

A straight line from Trump’s tweets announcing his transgender military ban to the Mattis Plan to execute it.

On May 11, together with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, GLAD filed a motion for summary judgment in Doe v. Trump. If our motion is granted, the court would permanently block the ban from taking effect.

This ban weakens our military. And in violating the equality guarantees of the Constitution, it demeans us all.

It harms transgender people. It’s an attack on American values. That’s why we’ve filed to put a stop to it for good.

While the administration is making claims that transgender people are “non-deployable,” thousands of transgender Americans are currently serving our country with honor and distinction. Many of our plaintiffs have done several tours of duty, including a transgender woman who has done two in Iraq.

The Trump-Pence ban relies on sweeping generalizations and false stereotypes about transgender people. But we saw right through their charade because we’ve seen this strategy before.

The Trump administration’s defense rests on a faulty argument that strikes at the core of who transgender people are. Their harmful “logic” goes like this: sure, transgender people can serve, as long as they serve in their birth sex.

It’s the same failed argument we heard when we fought for marriage equality: of course, a gay person could get married, as long as it was to someone of the opposite sex.

The Trump-Pence ban is harming brave servicemembers. And it is also part of this administration’s coordinated attack on all marginalized people.

Lives are in disarray and futures are at stake. But our community is strong, our passion for justice is great, and we won’t back down.

GLAD, NCLR File Motion to Permanently Stop Trump-Pence Trans Military Ban

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

New Trans Military Ban Filing from NCLR, GLAD Would Accelerate Final Court Ruling to Permanently Stop the Trump-Pence Ban

GLAD says, “The government’s own documents, newly obtained by discovery, show the March 23 ‘Mattis Plan’ is the same unconstitutional, categorical ban… President Trump announced on Twitter”

NCLR says, “Thousands of transgender servicemembers are currently serving—one of our Doe plaintiffs has in fact served multiple tours of duty abroad, two in Iraq. The ban erodes military readiness”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Transgender military ban plaintiffs in Doe v. Trump, the first lawsuit to challenge the Trump-Pence ban, filed a cross-motion for summary judgment last night in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs’ motion asserts that undisputed facts show the ban, including the March 23 Mattis implementation plan, violates their Equal Protection and Due Process rights, and that the court should provide permanent declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the Trump-Pence ban from ever being implemented.

The plaintiffs’ motion describes the ban as the only military “policy that excludes people from military service based on their membership in a class rather than on an individual’s fitness to serve” and calls out that “no other military policy excludes a class of persons from an equal opportunity to enlist or serve in the U.S. Armed Forces.”’ It also characterizes the March 23 “Mattis Plan” and panel report as “most notable for what it fails to do”: it does not and could not show that transgender people are not capable of meeting existing military standards for service. Instead, the “Mattis Plan” and panel report makes sweeping generalizations, relying on false stereotypes about mental health and deployability.

Plaintiffs also filed a separate motion last night opposing the administration’s motions to dismiss the case and to dissolve the nationwide preliminary injunction issued October 30, 2017 by District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

“The government’s own documents, newly obtained by discovery, show the March 23 ‘Mattis Plan’ is the same unconstitutional, categorical ban of all transgender people from military service that President Trump announced on Twitter,” said Jennifer Levi, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) Transgender Rights Project Director. “There is no reason to treat transgender people so unfairly. The Plaintiffs seek nothing more than to be held to the same standards applied to all other servicemembers.”

“By the military’s own count, thousands of transgender servicemembers are currently serving—one of our Doe plaintiffs has in fact served multiple tours of duty abroad, two in Iraq,” said Shannon Minter, National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) Legal Director. “The ban erodes military readiness and would be the only military policy to exclude otherwise qualified people for who they are rather than their fitness to serve.”

Arguments from the plaintiffs’ filings:

The Trump-Pence transgender military ban harms military readiness by irrationally excluding qualified transgender servicemembers.
Tthe Trump administration’s March 23 “Mattis Plan” excludes transgender people from service based on their transgender status, rather than on any medical basis.
The “Mattis Plan” is the same categorical ban on trans service tweeted by President Trump despite its alleged “exception” for transgender people who serve in their birth sex. Just as a policy requiring Muslims to serve in the military only if they renounce their faith would be a ban on military service by Muslims, a policy requiring transgender individuals to serve in their birth sex is a ban on military service by transgender people. It is also similar to the earlier failed argument, uniformly rejected by courts, that laws limiting marriage only to male-female couples did not discriminate against gay people because a gay person could marry a person of the opposite sex.
The Trump administration’s own documents, obtained through discovery, show that that the process leading to the “Mattis Plan” was specifically undertaken to produce a policy consistent with Trump’s complete ban on transgender service. Rather than providing a valid reason to treat transgender people differently, the plan relies on gender stereotypes and sweeping generalizations about the roles and capabilities of transgender people.
Excluding qualified, fit candidates from service based on sweeping group-based generalizations is irrational. For example, depression, anxiety, and suicide are more common among white people than black people, but the military does not bar white people from service. And women are twice as likely as men to suffer from anxiety disorders, but the military does not exclude women from service.
Defendants’ unit cohesion arguments boil down to a claim that, “simply by existing as such, transgender people undermine sex-based standards.” If “that claim were sufficient to justify barring transgender people from military service, it would also justify their exclusion from any, and all, institutions that maintain sex-based criteria for facilities, including schools, workplaces, public accommodations, and beyond”—something courts across the country have repeatedly dismissed.

With this filing, both the Trump administration and Doe v. Trump transgender military ban plaintiffs have now indicated to the court there are no factual disputes in this case that would need to be resolved by a trial. If Judge Kollar-Kotelly grants summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, the court would permanently block the Trump-Pence transgender military ban from taking effect.

BACKGROUND

July 26, 2017: President Trump tweeted that “the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military.”

March 23, 2018: President Trump accepts the “Mattis Plan” and issues a memorandum in which he “revoked” his August 25 Memorandum.

May 11, 2018: Plaintiffs file their cross-motion for summary judgment, as well as motions in opposition to Defendant’s motions to dissolve the injunction and dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint.

GLAD Calls on US Border Control to Allow Entry for Transgender Women Seeking Asylum, Condemns Violent Attacks

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

Following reports of violent and demeaning treatment of transgender women seeking asylum at the US border, including news of a shelter in which the women were staying in Tijuana, Mexico having been set on fire, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) issued the following statement:

The horrifying treatment of the transgender women who have traveled to our border seeking a reprieve from violence should be utterly unacceptable to every American.

Our core American ideals of liberty, democracy, and human rights require us to offer refuge to those who face severe threats in their home countries. Asylum is a life-saving system that is designed precisely to protect the extremely vulnerable. We have a responsibility to ensure that system is open and available to those who need it, including transgender people and other members of the LGBT community forced to flee places where they are fundamentally unsafe because of who they are.

We urge US Border Patrol to allow entry for all of these women and for the others who have traveled at great risk as part of the refugee caravan, to allow them the fair opportunity to make their case for asylum, and to ensure their safety and dignified treatment while their applications are processed.

News

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

In a bipartisan 14-10 vote, the New Hampshire Senate today passed HB 1319, a bill that will provide explicit comprehensive nondiscrimination protections for transgender people in employment, housing, and public spaces. The House passed HB 1319 in March by a strong bipartisan vote and the bill now goes to Governor Sununu for his signature. Once the bill is signed into law, New Hampshire will join 18 other states, including every state in New England, in providing comprehensive protections for transgender people.

Janson Wu, Executive Director of GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), one of the lead partners in the Freedom New Hampshire Coalition advocating to pass the bill, made the following statement:

Today, the New Hampshire Senate voted to affirm the dignity and humanity of transgender Granite Staters, and to ensure they have an equal opportunity to live and work free from discrimination. For more than a decade, transgender people across the state – along with family, friends, and freedom-loving allies – have spoken out, shared their stories, and led the fight to secure these critical protections. GLAD has been proud to be a partner in that work every step of the way.

We are grateful to the many senators and representatives, including HB 1319’s lead sponsor Rep. Ed Butler, who voted to make their state a safer and more just place for everyone. New Hampshire’s leadership today sets an example for the nation of the incredible progress bipartisan cooperation can achieve.

At a time when the rights of transgender people are under attack from the Trump-Pence administration on every front – from schools, to health care, to military service – this resounding victory in New Hampshire shows clearly that support for equality is not a partisan issue but a basic matter of American fairness. Voters in neighboring Massachusetts will soon have an opportunity to echo that fact, as the spotlight on transgender equality moves to the fight to protect the Bay State’s public accommodation nondiscrimination law at the ballot this November.

All Granite Staters can hold their heads high today, knowing that New Hampshire is truly embracing its ideals of freedom for all, and taking its place as a leader in the growing movement to secure equality across the nation.

Leading partners in the Freedom New Hampshire coalition fighting for HB 1319 include GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), Freedom for All Americans, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire (ACLU-NH), Human Rights Campaign, Transgender New Hampshire, and Rights and Democracy New Hampshire.

New Filing Fires Back at Trump Administration Request to Move Forward with Trans Military Ban

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

RIVERSIDE, Calif.—The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) filed their opposition last night to a Trump-Pence Administration request to dissolve the nationwide preliminary injunction that U.S. District Court Judge Jesus G. Bernal issued December 22, 2017, in Equality California’s lawsuit, Stockman v. Trump. There are currently four separate preliminary injunctions issued by four separate federal courts, blocking Trump’s ban from moving forward while the cases are being heard by the courts.

On March 23, the Trump administration filed a motion to dissolve the injunction, claiming to issue a “new policy” on transgender military service. However, as NCLR and GLAD demonstrate in the opposition filing, that policy merely details the steps the military plans to take to implement the ban that Judge Bernal and three other federal court judges have already blocked from taking effect.

“There’s nothing new here,” said Jennifer Levi, GLAD Transgender Rights Project Director. “The supposedly ‘new policy’ excludes transgender people from military service. It is the same ban the courts have already enjoined.”

“There is no justification for a special rule banning transgender people from military service rather than permitting them to serve on the same terms as everyone else,” said Shannon Minter, NCLR Legal Director. “Transgender troops have already been serving their country with honor and dignity for decades.”

“No matter what the White House calls it, this is the same unpatriotic and discriminatory ban that four federal courts have already blocked from moving forward,” said Equality California Executive Director Rick Zbur. “At a time when our nation faces serious threats around the world, it’s baffling that President Trump remains focused on undermining our military by ripping thousands of distinguished service members from their posts.”

”Transgender Americans are guaranteed the same right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as any other American,” said California Attorney General Xavier Becerra. “We owe transgender service members, like all Americans who courageously serve our nation, our support and gratitude for putting their lives on the line. President Trump’s transgender military service ban is primitive. It is discriminatory, plain and simple. We will fight it in every form.”

President Trump first announced his transgender military ban in a series of tweets in July 2017. Then in an August 25 memo, he directed the Secretary of Defense to create an implementation plan for his ban. In addition to Judge Bernal, three other federal district court judges have issued injunctions halting the ban, including in NCLR and GLAD’s DC-based case, Doe v. Trump. In each of the four cases, the courts have found that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that excluding transgender people from military service violates their guarantee of equal protection under the US Constitution. Earlier this month, Judge Marsha J. Pechman in the Washington state case Karnoski v. Trump, brought by Lambda Legal and Outserv-SLDN, denied the Trump administration’s request to lift that court’s injunction and ordered Karnoski to proceed to discovery and trial.

Top medical organizations and experts have refuted recent Trump administration attempts to justify its ban on transgender military service, including former Surgeons General, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association.

Senior military officials from all service branches have also confirmed that permitting transgender people to serve strengthens the force.

Stockman v. Trump was brought by Equality California on September 5, 2017, on behalf of the organization’s members as well as individual plaintiffs Aiden Stockman, Nicolas Talbott, Tamesyn Reeves, Jaquice Tate and three unnamed current service members. Attorney General Xavier Becerra intervened as a plaintiff on behalf of the State of California in November 2017.

In addition to NCLR and GLAD, plaintiffs in Stockman are represented by Latham & Watkins LLP.

Trump v. Hawaii

Home » National/Federal » Page 40

GLAD joined National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance (NQAPIA) in a friend-of-the-Court brief illustrating the disproportionate impact President Trump’s travel ban on people from a list of predominately Muslim countries would have on LGBTQ people.

Amicus co-signers include Immigration Equality, The New York City Gay And Lesbian Anti-Violence Project, The LGBT Bar Association of Los Angeles, The LGBT Bar Association of Greater New York, the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom, API Equality-Los Angeles, API Equality-Northern California, Invisible to Invincible: Asian Pacific Islander Pride of Chicago, KhushDC, Massachusetts Area South Asian Lambda Association, Queer South Asian Collective, The South Asian Lesbian and Gay Association of New York City, and Trikone-Northwest.

Action Opportunity

GLAD is proud to join the movement to respond to the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Hawai’i. While the decision date can’t be predicted, we anticipate that it will fall on a Monday in June. Join the gathering at the Supreme Court to show our strength as one justice movement and support equality for all.

Muslim Ban Decision Day
Date: To Be Determined
Time: 11:45am EST – 1:00pm EST
Location: US Supreme Court | 1 First St NE, Washington, DC 20543

RSVP page: www.wewillnotbebanned.org

Facebook event: www.facebook.com/events/175375686636175/