Blogue

Healthcare Bans are an Attack on Our Community’s Well-being, Decision-making, and Freedom

“Taking away our opportunity to help our daughter live a healthy and happy life is cruel and unfair.”

The quotes on this page are all from Florida parents GLAD represents in Doe v. Ladapo challenging a policy, first enacted by the state Boards of Medicine and Osteopathic Medicine codified in SB 254, that bans them from meeting essential healthcare needs for their transgender children. GLAD’s Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights, Jennifer Levi, was in federal court in Tallahassee on May 19 asking the judge to halt the ban and stop the unimaginable cruelty and distress these families face because they can’t access the healthcare they need.

In the ongoing campaign against LGBTQ+ rights, extremist forces are pushing for discriminatory legislation that specifically targets vulnerable members of our community, particularly LGBTQ+ youth and their families. One of the most alarming aspects of this campaign is the banning and, in some cases, criminalizing of safe and effective medical care for transgender youth.

“This ban puts me and other parents in the nightmare position of not being able to help our child when they need us most.”

As of May 2023, at least 19 states (Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia) have implemented these policies.

These bans disregard scientific evidence, representing an unjustified intrusion into personal and family medical decision-making. They contradict established guidelines based on extensive clinical research and are endorsed by esteemed medical associations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Doctors with expertise in treating the distress experienced by transgender youth unable to live authentically, as well as parents who witness the positive transformation in their transgender children when supported, widely criticize these bans.

“Having the resources and support to make the best decisions for our daughter’s wellbeing has been so important for our family. We just want to do what’s right for our kid.”

GLAD is challenging the bans in Florida and Alabama, arguing that they unlawfully deprive parents of their right to make decisions about their children’s medical treatment and violate the equal protection rights of transgender youth by denying them essential, doctor-recommended healthcare.

In fact, LGBTQ+ legal organizations are contesting these policies in nearly every state where they have been passed.

Encouragingly, even judges in the most conservative communities have recognized the unconstitutional nature of these bans, which infringe upon parents’ rights to make informed healthcare choices for their children and unfairly target transgender adolescents. Although litigation is ongoing, judges have issued temporary injunctions against these bans in Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Missouri, and Oklahoma and permanently blocked the ban in Arkansas.

Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi and Human Rights Campaign Litigation Director Cynthia Cheng-Wun Weaver — Jennifer Levi, Diretora Sênior de Direitos Transgêneros e Queer, e Cynthia Cheng-Wun Weaver, Diretora de Litígios da Campanha de Direitos Humanos

Last spring, GLAD helped secure a federal judge’s ruling in Alabama that blocked implementing the state’s criminal ban while the case moves forward. As we prepare for an anticipated trial, this injunction remains in effect.

In Florida, our motion for a preliminary injunction to halt the ban became more urgent when the state legislature passed SB 254 at the end of the session. This new law codifies the Boards of Medicine bans and adds criminal and civil penalties.

On June 6, a federal judge issued a strong ruling that blocks the enforcement of SB 254 and the Boards of Medicine rules for the plaintiff families, ensuring that their children can continue to access needed care.

The ruling also makes it clear that the law is unconstitutional and that the plaintiffs are likely to prevail once the Court issues a final ruling on the merits. It says powerfully that the ban violates parents’ rights to make medical decisions for their children and violates the equal protection rights of transgender people by denying them medically necessary, doctor-recommended healthcare.

Halting and overturning these harmful laws is crucial to safe-guarding access to essential healthcare and ensuring that parents of transgender youth can continue to provide guidance and support. It is also vital in countering the spread of misinformation, anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, and attacks on scientific knowledge and bodily autonomy, which aim to hinder progress.

“Our daughter is a happy, confident child, but this ban takes away our right to provide her with recommended healthcare.”

While LGBTQ+ community members and advocates are diligently working to halt these laws and provide support through mutual aid and information sharing, several states are also taking positive steps. As of May 2023, ten states—California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Vermont, and Washington— and the District of Columbia have enacted laws that protect transgender people’s access to healthcare. These laws include provisions to shield patients and providers from punitive measures in other states.

Additionally, bills addressing similar concerns are pending in Maine, Oregon, and elsewhere. These efforts reflect the widespread recognition of these healthcare bans for what they truly are: attacks on science, our families, our autonomy over our bodies, and our freedom and dignity. All of us — LGBTQ+ youth, adults, parents and families, supporters, and sensible policymakers — must join forces to reverse this backward trend and instead propel our nation toward greater liberation for all.

Visita www.GLAD.org for more on GLAD’s challenges to healthcare bans and other anti-LGBTQ+ laws and information on which states have passed healthcare shield laws. If you have questions about your situation or are experiencing issues with healthcare access, entre em contato com a GLAD Answers.

Esta história foi publicada originalmente no boletim informativo GLAD Briefs do verão de 2023. Ler mais.

Blogue

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

Meet Diretor Executivo Interino Richard Burns

Lifelong LGBTQ+ Activist and GLAD Interim Executive Director Richard Burns Cites the Need for Vigilance in the Battle for Full LGBTQ+ Equality and Liberation

Richard, a cis white man with short gray and auburn hair, stands at a podium wearing a navy blue suit — The American LGBTQ Museum Groundbreaking Ceremony © Leandro Justen

As GLAD prepares to begin a robust national search for the leader who will steer the organization’s next chapter, the board is pleased to bring on lifelong LGBTQ+ activist Richard Burns as Interim Executive Director. Richard began his tenure on October 10.

“Leadership transitions are important milestones in any organization at any time,” says Presidente do Conselho da GLAD, Shane Dunn. “When the rights of LGBTQ+ people, and especially transgender people, are so virulently under attack across the country, and threats to our democracy are creating new barriers to our mission of realizing LGBTQ+, racial, HIV, and gender justice, we recognize an even greater responsibility to be thorough and thoughtful in this process.”

“We must have a commitment to vigilance, always. The battle for LGBTQ+ equality and liberation will go on for generations. We have to have heart. We have to have grit. We have to have resilience and hope.”
Richard Burns

“With significant leadership experience, including multiple tenures as an interim Executive Director, and a deep commitment to GLAD’s goals as an anti-racist, intergenerational legal advocacy organization, Richard will be able to support GLAD’s ongoing critical work with minimal disruption, allowing us the time to develop a careful search process and a diverse, talented, and passionate candidate pool for GLAD’s next permanent Executive Director,” Dunn adds.

Richard’s passion for justice and commitment to advancing equality has led him from Boston to New York and across the country as an advocate and organizational leader. He served more than twenty years as Executive Director of the New York City Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center beginning at the height of the AIDS crisis, and later developed and led the LGBT Leadership Initiative previously housed at the Arcus Foundation.

In recent years, he has effectively steered several social and racial justice-focused organizations through transition periods as an interim ED, including the Drug Policy Alliance, the North Star Fund, the Funding Exchange, Funders for LGBTQ Issues, the Stonewall Community Foundation, Lambda Legal, and, most recently the Johnson Family Foundation. 

But “Boston formed me,” Richard says, speaking of his roots in the LGBTQ+ legal advocacy movement and, specifically, with GLAD.

In addition to co-founding the Massachusetts LGBTQ+ Bar Association and the Boston Lesbian & Gay Policy Alliance in 1982, he was president of GLAD’s founding board from 1978-1986 and has maintained his commitment to the organization for 45 years.

He talks of GLAD’s radical founding by John Ward at a time when movements for LGBTQ+, racial, and gender justice were converging, and new organizations began to spring up together to advance liberation for all people. On his first day of law school at Northeastern in 1980, Richard met the late Urvashi Vaid – long-time LGBTQ+ activist and a former GLAD Spirit of Justice honoree – who would become a lifelong friend, a GLAD colleague as an early legal intern, and an inspiration in conceptualizing revolutionary, inclusive queer liberation. Richard is chair of the founding Board of the American LGBTQ+ Museum, an in-development project co-founded by Urvashi, among others, to preserve, research, and share LGBTQ+ history and culture.

Kevin Cathcart, Richard Burns & Urvashi Vaid in front of Spiritus in Provincetown, late 1990’s

In the late 1970s, Richard was managing editor of the Boston-based national feminist, progressive LGBTQ+ newsweekly Gay Community News (GCN), which both chronicled and shaped intersectional queer activism at the time. GCN had an active early prison pen pal program, and Richard was a plaintiff in a successful lawsuit when the U.S. Bureau of Prisons declared GCN and another publication, the Task Force’s It’s Time, obscene and tried to block distribution to incarcerated individuals.

Richard also has the rare distinction of involvement with all three of our major LGBTQ+ legal organizations. In addition to his founding role with GLAD, Richard clerked at the National Center for Lesbian Rights while in law school and served on the board of Lambda Legal beginning in 1980.

In preparing to take on the Interim Director role at GLAD at this pivotal moment, Richard is clear that we must take lessons both from the early days of LGBTQ+ and AIDS activism and draw on the wisdom of today’s justice fighters – working with, and learning from, all movements for liberation.

“We all bring all of our identities with us everywhere. In order to build a just society, we’ve got to take into account all of our collective identities. We can’t leave anyone behind,” Richard says.

Recognizing that the far right has all of us in its sights–our movements for reproductive justice, racial equity, LGBTQ+ liberation, and beyond – he adds:

“We must have a commitment to vigilance, always. The battle for LGBTQ+ equality and liberation will go on for generations. We have to have heart. We have to have grit. We have to have resilience and hope.”

Opportunities to Meet GLAD’s Interim Executive Director:

Wednesday, October 25: Defining Gay Community News

Richard Burns will moderate a panel celebrating the 50^º anniversary of Gay Community News on Wednesday, October 25, 6 p.m., at the Massachusetts Historical Society. Visit the History Project for details.

Thursday, November 9: Spirit of Justice

Richard will speak at our annual Spirit of Justice Award Dinner. Visit www.GLAD.org/SOJ to join us.

Esta história foi publicada originalmente no boletim informativo GLAD Briefs do outono de 2023. Ler mais.

Blogue

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

Defendendo Nossa Humanidade Comum

Os ataques da extrema direita estão colocando jovens transgênero e suas famílias em perigo direto, colocando todos nós em risco. Estamos reagindo.

Todos nós merecemos viver e amar livremente, ser apoiados e celebrados por quem somos. O atual ataque de legislação anti-LGBTQ+ está mirando esses ideais fundamentais, com consequências devastadoras para crianças, famílias e todos nós.

Desde 2021, 22 estados aprovaram proibições de acesso à saúde para pessoas transgênero e 23 estados proibiram crianças transgênero, desde o ensino fundamental, de praticar esportes escolares. Vários estados aprovaram alguma versão da lei "Não Diga Gay ou Trans", censurando professores, escolas e alunos. Outros tornaram impossível para alunos transgêneros e de gênero diverso usarem o banheiro da escola.

Alguns estados agora exigem que as escolas entreguem os alunos aos pais, uma política que grupos de extrema direita também defendem nos tribunais e nas comunidades locais. Tais políticas interferem na capacidade dos professores de apoiar seus alunos e de ajudar a garantir que os pais tenham os recursos necessários para apoiar seus filhos LGBTQ+.

“Apoiaremos esses pais e seus filhos para que enfrentem essa realidade perigosa em todos os níveis.
– Jennifer Levi, Diretora Sênior de Direitos Transgêneros e Queer

Os estados estão tentando proibir shows de drag e manter livros sobre famílias LGBTQ+ fora das bibliotecas escolares.

A extrema direita está promovendo sua agenda antidemocrática às custas de jovens e adultos transgêneros e LGBQ+. Felizmente, aqueles de nós que acreditam na liberdade e em nossa humanidade comum estão reagindo.

A GLAD está no meio da luta, desafiando diretamente as leis no Alabama, Flórida e New Hampshire, e apoiando nossas organizações parceiras em outras batalhas jurídicas pelo país.

No Alabama, estamos contestando a proibição criminal de assistência médica para adolescentes transgêneros.

No ano passado, apresentamos dois dias de depoimentos em um tribunal federal de especialistas médicos e científicos, adolescentes transgêneros e seus pais. O Tribunal concluiu, como todos os outros juízes de tribunais distritais em todo o país que ouviram os fatos desde então, que não há razão justificável para o estado proibir categoricamente o acesso a cuidados médicos seguros, estabelecidos e necessários simplesmente porque alguém é transgênero.

Um painel dos 11^º O Tribunal de Apelações do Circuito reverteu recentemente a decisão do tribunal distrital. Estamos solicitando o total de 11^º O circuito deve reconsiderar a opinião do painel e preservar a liminar que impede a aplicação da lei.

Na Flórida, onde outro tribunal distrital também bloqueou preliminarmente uma lei que proíbe cuidados para adolescentes transgêneros, estamos nos preparando para um julgamento completo em dezembro. Também estamos contestando as restrições impostas à capacidade de adultos transgêneros de obter cuidados de saúde relacionados à transição de gênero.

Essas leis têm como alvo pessoas transgênero e colocam os pais na posição excruciante de não conseguirem oferecer aos seus filhos adolescentes os cuidados que eles sabem que precisam para prosperar.

Como Jennifer Levi, Diretora Sênior de Direitos Transgêneros e Queer e o principal advogado da GLAD no Alabama e na Flórida afirmou: “Apoiaremos esses pais e seus filhos na luta contra essa realidade perigosa em todos os níveis”.

Em New Hampshire, estamos contestando uma lei de censura escolar que impede os professores de conversar honestamente com os alunos sobre raça, deficiência e identidades LGBTQ+.

Em toda a Nova Inglaterra, trabalhamos horas extras nas últimas três sessões para impedir os mesmos projetos de lei anti-LGBTQ+ prejudiciais que estamos vendo em todo o país.

Isso inclui a derrota bem-sucedida de um projeto de lei no ano passado que teria revertido a proibição em New Hampshire da prática desmascarada e perigosa da chamada terapia de conversão. Uma tentativa de contestar a proibição da terapia de conversão em outro estado está pendente de análise na Suprema Corte dos EUA.

Às vezes, pode parecer que esses ataques surgiram do nada. Mas sabemos que não. Nossa comunidade fez um progresso tremendo nos últimos 20 anos e a direita está se esforçando para reverter isso.

Há duas décadas, começamos a ver estados aprovando proteções expressas contra a discriminação de pessoas transgênero. Hoje, quase metade dos estados possui tais leis em vigor.

Lutamos pela nossa liberdade, pelo nosso direito de sermos nós mesmos, de viver e amar plenamente, e de celebrar a nossa humanidade compartilhada. É uma luta que não podemos perder.

Vitórias legais, pesquisas educacionais e advocacia comunitária levaram as escolas a um lugar de compreensão mais profunda sobre a importância e a justiça de apoiar alunos transgêneros para que se expressem e sejam respeitados por quem são.

A comunidade médica desenvolveu políticas e práticas para tornar os tratamentos seguros e eficazes para a disforia de gênero mais acessíveis. Cada vez mais famílias têm as ferramentas para compreender e apoiar seus filhos transgêneros.

Em 2020, a Suprema Corte afirmou que a discriminação com base na condição transgênero e na orientação sexual é ilegal segundo a lei federal. E, no início deste ano, a Suprema Corte se recusou a revisar uma decisão histórica do Tribunal de Apelações do Quarto Circuito, afirmando que a Lei dos Americanos com Deficiência protege pessoas transgênero da discriminação por deficiência.

Maior visibilidade e compreensão de nossas vidas e maiores proteções legais tornaram mais possível para pessoas transgênero e LGBQ+ participarem plenamente da vida cívica – viverem e amarem livremente, serem acolhidas por famílias e integradas totalmente em nossas comunidades.

Agora, um esforço deliberado de atores influentes e politicamente motivados busca substituir nossa humanidade compartilhada por medo e desinformação.

Nosso poder está na ação coletiva: defendendo direitos em tribunais e legislaturas, participando das urnas, do ativismo popular e de conversas cotidianas.

E a boa notícia é que, mesmo agora, quando lutamos, podemos vencer.

Mais de 500 projetos de lei anti-LGBTQ+ foram apresentados em todo o país este ano – e a vasta maioria deles foi derrotada. Quando os tribunais federais tiveram a oportunidade de ouvir nossos argumentos completos e compreender verdadeiramente o impacto dessas leis na vida das pessoas, nós vencemos. Muitos projetos de lei hostis já foram aprovados, sem dúvida. Mas também não podemos perder de vista quantos derrotamos.

E embora às vezes pareça que estamos apenas na defesa, também continuamos promovendo leis para proteger nossa comunidade.

Este ano, Michigan tornou-se o 23º^rd estado, juntamente com DC e as Ilhas Virgens Americanas, para fornecer proteções abrangentes contra discriminação para pessoas LGBTQ+.

Quinze estados adotaram “leis de proteção ao provedor” que protegem o acesso a cuidados médicos para pessoas transgênero – a GLAD trabalhou com parceiros estaduais para aprovar tais leis em Massachusetts e Vermont, com mais por vir.

No Maine, neste ano, ajudamos a aprovar uma lei que cria um caminho para que adolescentes transgêneros de 16 e 17 anos obtenham cuidados médicos em circunstâncias extraordinárias nas quais um dos pais se opõe ao atendimento, mesmo que negá-lo resulte em danos.

Aqueles que querem nos fazer retroceder e colocar nossa comunidade em perigo têm muito poder e recursos, é verdade. Temos muito trabalho pela frente e sabemos que não venceremos todas as lutas. Mas lutamos por nossa liberdade, por nosso direito de sermos nós mesmos, de viver e amar plenamente, e de celebrar nossa humanidade compartilhada.

Essa é uma luta que não podemos perder.

Esta história foi publicada originalmente no boletim informativo GLAD Briefs do outono de 2023. Ler mais.

Blogue

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

Protecting LGBTQ+ Students

Creating Safe and Inclusive Schools Together

All students deserve to feel safe and included at school and have an educational environment that welcomes and affirms their full identities.

Research demonstrates that such positive school climates are necessary for all youth to learn and thrive. For many LGBTQ+ students, this journey includes sharing their identity with their friends or a trusted teacher before they’re ready to do so at home. While most youth want to and do come out to their family in their own time, some are losing that choice. Far-right legal groups are challenging these positive school policies, and some states are enacting laws that would force faculty to contact students’ homes before the students are ready, under the guise of “parents’ rights.”

The past few years of intense political scrutiny and legislative attacks have taken a toll on young people’s mental health and led to trans and LGBQ youth experiencing increased harassment. And so-called “parents’ rights” bills have made it less safe for young people who can’t be their authentic selves with their families. Teachers care about their students and know that generally, kids do better when they can talk to their parents. But sadly, that’s not an option for some youth, leading them to feel isolated both at home and school. But we are fighting to protect todos youth, whether they cannot come out at home or need support to discuss their identities with their parents when they are ready.

These “forced outing” bills directly contradict schools’ responsibility to create a supportive educational environment. Federal constitutional protections and many state-based laws are in place to safeguard the rights of LGBTQ+ students. Nevertheless, even in states with explicit obligations to protect LGBTQ+ youth, a vocal minority is attempting to deny young people the autonomy to choose when and how to share their identities with their families.

In September, The First Circuit Court of Appeals heard Foote v. Town of Ludlow, which centers on this issue. We submitted a friend-of-the-court brief with the Massachusetts Superintendent’s Association, sharing research that shows positive school climates and trusted relationships with adults are critical to academic success for all students.

“When teachers and other educators acknowledge and respect students, including their requested names and pronouns, that creates the safety that allows brain development and learning to flourish while also meeting the requirement of equal educational opportunity,” said Mary Bonauto, Senior Director of Civil Rights and Legal Strategies, at the filing.

GLAD is committed to protecting students and ensuring schools can create positive, inclusive learning environments. But parents and allies can make an impact too.

In addition to supporting GLAD in this crucial work, you can advocate for the LGBTQ+ youth in your life by checking out our website’s school resources page. You’ll find information on LGBTQ+ student rights, bullying protections, and guidance for schools in every New England state and across the country. We’ve also included resources from our partners on inclusion for transgender students in school sports and all areas of academic life, how to advocate for positive school climates, resources for educators, and more.

Familiarizing yourself with these resources can help you advocate for youth and encourage schools to meet their responsibility to ensure equal education and safety for all students. Public schools and many private schools are legally obligated to act when students face bullying and other kinds of mistreatment or harassment so that all students can learn and thrive.

If you need further support, Respostas GLAD can provide free and confidential legal information and assistance.

Esta história foi publicada originalmente no boletim informativo GLAD Briefs do outono de 2023. Ler mais.

Blogue

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

A Dignidade e a Igualdade de Todos os Indivíduos

**Celebrating 20 Years Since Goodridge v. DPH Brought the Freedom to Marry to Massachusetts, and Eventually the Nation**

An excerpt of this article appears in the November/December 2023 issue of Boston Spirit.

Twenty years ago, on November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court broke the historic barrier on LGBTQ+ people marrying in its landmark Goodridge v. Departamento de Saúde Pública decision – making Massachusetts the first state to rule that the freedom to marry, or not, must be equally applicable to LGBTQ+ people. This ruling required opening the door to legal marriages in six months’ time.

In the words of Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall’s majority opinion, “The Massachusetts Constitution affirms the dignity and equality of all Individuals. It forbids the creation of second-class citizens.” This celebration of the commitment, intimacy, family, and mutuality in marriage continues to be quoted in wedding celebrations in Massachusetts and worldwide.

GLAD filed Goodridge in April 2001 on behalf of 7 couples seeking something both simple and profound: constitutional respect for their personal commitment by ending the exclusion on joining in legal marriage and marriage’s protections, rights, and responsibilities. 

With tremendous gratitude and in recognition of their momentous impact on our community, state, and nation, we were thrilled to celebrate the Goodridge plaintiffs as the 2023 Spirit of Justice Award Honorees at GLAD’s Spirit of Justice Dinner.

We honored Gloria Bailey-Davies, Linda Bailey-Davies, Edward Balmelli, Maureen Brodoff, Gary Chalmers, Rob Compton, Hillary Goodridge, Julie Goodridge, Michael Horgan, Richard Linnell, Gina Nortonsmith, Heidi Nortonsmith, Ellen Wade, and David Wilson.

Spirit of Justice Award Dinner graphic - blue with justice statue on right. Thurs Nov 9. Join the can't miss event for supporters of LGBTQ+ equality

Each of them authentically gave of themselves and created connections and bridges of understanding with the wider community even while in a crucible of media and political attention and conflict. They advanced equal rights for all of us in Massachusetts and that beacon of hope spread far and wide. With other marriage plaintiffs, including in challenges in Hawaii and Vermont before Goodridge, and cases across the country after, the Goodridge plaintiffs’ full and complete victory paved the way for more.

Several people, the Goodridge plaintiffs, standing together in front of GLAD banner — *Goodridge* plaintiffs at the 2013 Spirit of Justice Award Dinner with Honoree Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall and Mary Bonauto

The reality of people’s marriages in Massachusetts set the stage for dismantling the federal Defense of Marriage Act – first in GLAD’s 2009 challenge in federal court and 2012 unanimous victory at the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and then carried through by other plaintiffs at the Supreme Court in 2013. Community members and organizations, including GLAD, worked together in legislatures and courts across the U.S. In 2013, GLAD was asked to join the team representing plaintiffs in Michigan, in the case that would lead to the Supreme Court Obergefell ruling for marriage equality nationwide in 2015.

Looking back now, it can be tempting to think this was all inevitable. But that is far from true.

It took relentless hard work, commitment, and courage from the 14 plaintiffs, attorneys, amici and their attorneys, and so many others. The Goodridge plaintiffs withstood a trial court loss – expected but still disappointing – and redoubled their efforts to connect with people about why marriage was important to them.

Victory was sweet. The Supreme Judicial Court’s (SJC) beautiful and momentous ruling on November 18, 2003, was a triumph. Even so, it wasn’t the end. The reactions were swift – both the eruption of joy and celebration and also the backlash. 

At the same time, the legislature, meeting in a constitutional convention, debated whether to constitutionally ban marriage for same-sex couples or to defend the court’s ruling.

“I stand with the SJC” stickers were everywhere, along with throngs of supporters and opponents inside and outside the State House.

Amidst all of this, couples acted on the simple desire to protect their, in some cases, decades-long love and commitment, and planned wedding celebrations. 

Finally, May 17, 2004, dawned with early morning talk shows and LGBTQ+ people and allies supporting couples seeking to marry in cities and towns across the Commonwealth.

“The Massachusetts Constitution affirms the dignity and equality of all Individuals. It forbids the creation of second-class citizens.”
– Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall

The joy was palpable as Massachusetts, with the eyes of the nation on us, inaugurated the first legally-recognized marriages of same-sex couples in the country.

And still, there was work to do. There were multiple more constitutional convention sessions and lawsuits about required procedures. Most importantly, the people of the Commonwealth were engaged with their elected officials, neighbors, and family members.

Finally, the legislature conclusively rejected the last proposed constitutional amendment in June 2007 with over ¾ of the vote of the House and Senate. The Commonwealth had taken a cue from the Goodridge plaintiffs in finding common ground and our common humanity.

It was official – marriage equality was now here to stay in Massachusetts.

The legal victory and the incredible defense mounted by everyday people in Massachusetts to protect it created momentum for equality, but national progress was still infuriatingly slow.

Politicians seeking to create fear and win power seized on our community’s fight for basic dignity and human rights – something we are seeing again today. State laws were changed to ban marriage and cut off any legal protections for a couple’s relationship. Hostile politicians drove a wave of constitutional amendments across the country.

It wasn’t until 2008 that GLAD secured the next lasting court victory, at the Connecticut Supreme Court in Kerrigan and Mock v. Dept. of Public Health. We will be celebrating 15 years of marriage in Connecticut on November 12, just before the 20^º anniversary of Goodridge.

After Connecticut, we began to see more state court, legislative, and ballot victories for the freedom to marry.

Crucial legislative victories for marriage equality in the New England States of Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire proved that we could make change in the democratic process and not only the courts. We had to go back to the ballot in Maine in 2012, which then became the first state to win marriage by popular vote of the people. And in early 2013, our campaign in New England concluded with Rhode Island’s marriage enactment. 

Slowly but increasingly perceptibly, more and more of the public were coming to engage the possibility of, and then embracing, the dignity and equality of LGBTQ+ individuals and our relationships. 

The journey from a state constitutional law case in Massachusetts to the national marriage victory in Obergefell v. Hodges at the Supreme Court in 2015 results from the changed minds, hard work, courage, resilience, and persistence of so many across society and law. As queer historian George Chauncey has put it though, there would be no Obergefell without Goodridge, and we happily celebrate the 14 trailblazing plaintiffs who led the way.

Cementing Dignity and Equality in Federal Law 

President BIden signing the RMA surrounded by legislators, outside of the White House — Signing ceremony at the White House

In June 2022, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called for reconsideration of Obergefell – and other key cases protecting individual freedoms – in his concurrence in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health ruling that overturned 50 years of precedent on abortion rights. It was neither the first nor the last time we’ve seen direct threats to marriage equality, but it spurred action years in the making to require state and federal recognition of people’s marriages and forbid discrimination based on the sex, race, or ethnicity of the spouses. With bipartisan support, President Biden signed the federal “Respect for Marriage Act” in December 2022 to provide LGBTQ+ families and others across the country with the assurance that their marriages will continue to be respected by our state and federal governments.

“It takes the efforts of many to bend the arc of history toward justice… Even now there are so many places where people in our community are under attack. The work will continue, but look how far we’ve come.”
– Goodridge plaintiff Heidi Nortonsmith

We are alert to efforts to chip away at civil marriage equality and the equal status of LGBTQ+ people more broadly. This includes creating speech and religious objections to the basic rules of equal treatment, as in this summer’s narrow but alarming Supreme Court 303 Creative ruling and others. We also see it in the widespread state legislative threats to LGBTQ+ people’s making any claims to basic human or legal respect, whether in schools, healthcare settings, the public marketplace, and other areas of daily life. Our community is working overtime to defend and protect one another and affirm what we know is true and right in these extremely challenging times.  

While this fight is hard, we know we can fight through losses and gaps in public understanding, as we have with marriage, with laws criminalizing intimacy, with our community’s response to the HIV epidemic, and with two decades of advances in the rights of transgender people, who are now facing devastating backlash. It is never easy or immediate, but when we work together from a place of love and commitment for the long term, we win.  

“It takes the efforts of many to bend the arc of history toward justice,” Goodridge plaintiff Heidi Nortonsmith said at the White House signing ceremony for the Respect for Marriage Act. “Even now there are so many places where people in our community are under attack. The work will continue, but look how far we’ve come. The law that President Biden signs today will make people safer, more secure, and less alone. From our family to all of you, thank you for fighting for our equal humanity and dignity. For our right to love and be loved. And for our marriage.” 

Unfinished Business: Ensuring Protections for Our Families

Selfie of MA parent with child smiling — MA parent Kam and her son

Today Massachusetts is proud of its leadership on marriage equality, and rightly so. But twenty years after the landmark Goodridge ruling, the state has unfinished business to ensure LGBTQ+ families – including our children – are fully protected by connecting them legally with their parents. Massachusetts’ statutes on establishing parentage – the legal relationship between a child and their parents – remain decades out of date. As a result, children born to LGBTQ+ families and other children born with the aid of assisted reproduction are left vulnerable, without the security of the law recognizing their relationship to their parents. We need the legislature to act this year to pass the Massachusetts Parentage Act to provide a statutory roadmap that equally protects all families.

Esta história foi publicada originalmente no boletim informativo GLAD Briefs do outono de 2023. Ler mais.

Blogue

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

Our Fight for LGBTQ+ Youth

We’ve been working together for decades to make sure LGBTQ+ youth have the support and freedom they need to be themselves and thrive as part of their communities.

From establishing the right for gay students to enjoy Prom with their boyfriend or girlfriend like any other kid, to making sure transgender students can participate in school on the same terms as everyone else, GLAD – and you – have worked alongside inspiring LGBTQ+ young people to imagine and create a better world.

Now, with new waves of attacks against LGBTQ+ youth, we must continue to protect the vision we share for a safer and more free future.

With your support, GLAD is:

Fighting to protect access to established medical care that helps transgender youth survive and thrive.

This week, we asked the full 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to preserve a federal district court decision blocking Alabama’s ban on healthcare for transgender youth.

As GLAD’s Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights, Jennifer Levi said:

“Enforcement of Alabama’s criminal transgender healthcare ban will harm thousands of transgender adolescents across Alabama and will put Alabama parents in the excruciating position of not being able to get the medical care their children need to thrive. We will support these parents and their kids in pushing back against that dangerous reality on every level.”

Defending supportive school policies that enable trans youth and all students to learn and grow.

Today, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals is hearing an important case on whether schools can support transgender students even if some parents disagree. We submitted a friend of the court brief with the MA Superintendent’s Association, sharing research that shows positive school climates and trusted relationships with adults are critical to academic success for all students.

As Mary Bonauto, Senior Director of Civil Rights and Legal Strategies, said:

“When teachers and other educators acknowledge and respect students, including their requested names and pronouns, that creates the safety that allows brain development and learning to flourish while also meeting the requirement of equal educational opportunity. Parents have a right to be involved in their children’s education, but parents and students have navigated these and other issues before without a new constitutional mandate of disclosure and can do so today.”

Ensuring students can learn about themselves and the world around them without bans on important topics like LGBTQ+ identities, race, and racism.

Last month, GLAD and our partners asked a federal district court in New Hampshire to declare the state’s harmful “Banned Concepts” law unconstitutional.

As GLAD Attorney Chris Erchull said:

“Public school teachers work hard every day to ensure students can develop the knowledge and critical thinking skills they need to be successful and contribute to their communities. Teachers can’t do that effectively when they are subject to this vague law, with no guidance, that forces them to limit class discussions and avoid certain important topics altogether. LGBTQ+, BIPOC, and students with disabilities are being especially harmed, but the chilling effect of this law is doing a severe disservice to all students, when their teachers can’t ensure they gain a full, rich understanding of history and the people and world around them.”

With your help, GLAD will never stop working to support LGBTQ+ youth and secure a better future for all of us.

Support this important work

Notícias

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

GLAD Cheers Federal Department of Health and Human Services Move to Strengthen Non-discrimination Protections for LGBTQ+ People Accessing Vital Programs

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) is pleased that the Biden Administration has moved to prevent discrimination against LGBTQ+ people in important social services programs funded by the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

“At a time when many state legislatures are working overtime to prevent LGBTQ+ people—particularly transgender people—from accessing health care and essential services, we appreciate the Biden Administration’s move to clearly ensure protection for the constitutional rights of LGBTQ+ people and their families to receive services they need to maintain their health and well-being,” said Jennifer Levi, Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders.

Notícias

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

Statement on Supreme Court Ruling in 303 Criativo v. Elenis

In a 6-3 ruling today 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.

Based on the facts agreed upon by the parties, the Court found that the seller vets and endorses each client, meets with the couple to discuss “unique” stories, creates original artwork, designs and text for each, and explicitly expresses her support for their wedding. All of this, the Court said, pointed to the “expressive” nature of her conduct and justied a narrow exception to the nondiscrimination law. This is different from virtually all businesses that sell goods and services to the public and does not reflect how the overwhelming majority of companies operate.

Mary Bonauto, Senior Director of Civil Rights and Legal Strategies at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, issued the following statement:

“While today’s ruling is extremely limited, we are disappointed to see that for the first time, and in the context of LGBTQ+ people who are already facing a “heartbreaking” “backlash to the movement for liberty and equality for gender and sexual minorities,” as the dissent noted, an unprecedented exemption to nondiscrimination laws that have always been considered to forbid conduct, not speech. This is not the broad victory Lorie Smith and her counsel sought – today’s ruling importantly upholds the validity of nondiscrimination laws, including for LGBTQ+ people who may obtain goods and services ‘on the same terms offered to other members of the public’ – but it is not the end of efforts to push LGBTQ+ people and couples into a second class status. GLAD and our movement will resist that effort every step of the way.

For decades, case law and public agreement have upheld the principle that nondiscrimination laws are bound up with first principles of equality, with mutual respect and civic unity, and with our need for goods and services no matter who and where we are. It is crucial to ensure today’s ruling remains limited to the highly specific and customized services the Court found in this case, and is not seen as a green light to assert a free speech defense in other areas of law. Denying services to same-sex couples is out of step with what the vast majority of Americans believe, and the overwhelming majority of Americans, including business owners, strive to treat everyone with dignity and respect as they too want to be treated. Today’s decision from the Supreme Court does not change that.

LGBTQ+ people are family members, co-workers, business owners, and customers in every community and we remain committed to working alongside our neighbors to ensure all people can go about our daily lives and access the goods and services we need without discrimination. As Justice Kennedy summarized for several of the current justices in Masterpiece Cakeshop just 5 years ago, ‘religious and philosophical objections of business owners and other actors in the economy and in society” do not suffice to ‘deny protected persons equal access to goods and services” under public accommodations laws like Colorado’s.’ We will fight to maintain that principle for todos of the people protected by nondiscrimination laws.”

GLAD submitted a friend of the Court brief in this case for GLAD, NCLR, Lambda Legal, HRC, The Task Force, and thanks White & Case for its assistance.

Visite o 303 Criativo v. Elenis case page.

Notícias

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

Statement of Janson Wu, Executive Director of GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, on the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Affirmative Action in College Admissions

“Today’s majority opinion ending the consideration of race as one of many factors for qualified students in college admissions 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 14thAmendment to our constitution was intended to address. Equal educational opportunities are fundamental to reducing barriers to economic, leadership, and other life opportunities, to ensuring full participation and a diversity of perspectives in a robust, multi-racial democracy, and to realizing freedom for all.

The benefits that accrue to all students from being able to learn from others of different perspectives and experiences, and to build respect for one another, cannot be overstated. I attended Harvard College as an Asian-American student in the late 1990s. Coming from a predominantly white community in rural upstate New York, the racial diversity of students and backgrounds opened a new world of experiences and relationships that led to greater growth, learning, and discovery.

Today’s decision will make it harder for colleges and universities to provide that same learning environment that benefited me and all students, including Asian-American students – but we cannot and will not turn our backs on that goal.

As Justice Jackson plainly put it in her dissent in the North Carolina case: The only way out of this morass—for all of us—is to stare at racial disparity unblinkingly, and then do what evidence and experts tell us is required to level the playing field and march forward together, collectively striving to achieve true equality for all Americans.

While the Court has spoken as to admissions, it remains true that life experiences, including those related to a person’s race, are matters that can be lifted up by prospective students and sought and considered by educational institutions in line with their missions. We must and will keep working together to ensure every student has the opportunity to pursue their dreams.”

Saiba mais sobre o caso.

Notícias

Lar » National/Federal » Page 11

HIV Medicine Association and National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors Warn of Tens of Thousands of New HIV Cases and Billions in Health Care Costs if Decision in Braidwood v. Becerra is Allowed to Stand

The organizations, which represent thousands of healthcare providers, public officials, and policy experts with expertise in the treatment and prevention of HIV and the demographics and dynamics of the epidemic, filed a friend-of-the-court brief today in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

The HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA) and the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors (NASTAD) today filed a memorando de amigo do tribunal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, urging reversal of the federal district court order in Braidwood v. Becerra. That ruling blocked a requirement under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that insurers cover designated preventive care services, including HIV PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis), without cost sharing. HIV PrEP is an extraordinary medical breakthrough that reduces the risk of HIV transmission by close to one hundred percent.

The brief was authored by attorneys at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders and the law firm Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.

NASTAD and HIVMA include thousands of physicians and other healthcare providers with expertise in the treatment and prevention of HIV; government public officials from every state responsible for stopping the epidemic; and policy experts who understand the demographics and dynamics of the epidemic. Their brief lays out critical information demonstrating how requiring copays and deductibles for PrEP will significantly decrease utilization of PrEP, cause tens of thousands of new and preventable HIV cases, with billions of dollars in associated healthcare costs, and reverse the progress our nation has made towards curbing, and ultimately ending, the HIV epidemic.

“Como uma organização que representa milhares de médicos e outros profissionais de saúde que trabalham na linha de frente da epidemia de HIV em comunidades por todo o país, estamos profundamente preocupados com os impactos nocivos e de longo alcance que esta decisão terá se for mantida”, disse Michelle Cespedes, MD, MS, presidente da HIVMA. “Reinstating cost-sharing for PrEP would directly cause tens of thousands of preventable cases of HIV transmission and set back decades of progress toward curbing the epidemic.”

While the ruling from the Texas court in Braidwood v. Becerra broadly enjoined the cost-sharing mandate for all recommended preventive services, the case began as a challenge specifically to the requirement to cover PrEP without copays or deductibles. The brief filed today provides the Court of Appeals with important historical and current-day information about the tremendous toll the HIV epidemic has had on millions of lives, as well as the role discrimination and stigma have played in preventing Americans from accessing highly effective prevention and treatment.

"O Braidwood a decisão está enraizada no estigma e na intolerância em relação à comunidade LGBTQ+ e às pessoas vulneráveis ao VIH”, disse o Dr. Stephen Lee, Diretor Executivo da NASTAD. “It will cause incalculable harm to our efforts to end the HIV epidemic. We are pleased to join HIVMA in filing an amicus brief to help offer insight into why this decision is so detrimental to our HIV/AIDS public health system.”

The brief cites a recent epidemiological analysis conducted by experts at Harvard and Yale predicting, under the most cautious and conservative estimates, that blocking the ACA’s no cost sharing provision for PrEP will result in an additional 2,057 HIV infections in the first year alone. Including an additional predicted 1,892 secondary infections brings that number to 3,949 people with HIV in just the first year, which will cost the healthcare system a staggering $1.66 billion. Extending that conservative model just five years into the future predicts approximately an additional 20,000 people with HIV and costs to the United States healthcare system of over $8 billion as a result of the reimposition of barriers to accessing PrEP.

The brief also describes the sobering and unacceptable racial/ethnic and geographic disparities in both the impact of the epidemic and access to PrEP. In 2021, the CDC estimates that only 11% of Black people and 20% of Hispanic/Latino people who could benefit from PrEP were prescribed it, as opposed to 78% of White people. In the same year, more than half (52%) of new HIV infections were in the U.S. South, yet the states with the highest unmet need for PrEP are Alabama, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Mississippi.

“Co-pagamentos e franquias impedem as pessoas de terem acesso aos cuidados de saúde”, disse Ben Klein, Diretor Sênior de Contencioso e Direito do HIV na GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders. “PrEP is nearly 100% effective at preventing transmission of HIV but it is already underutilized, particularly among Black and Latino communities. As the brief filed today by HIVMA and NASTAD demonstrates, allowing the lower court’s ruling in Braidwood v. Becerra to stand will exacerbate racial health disparities, increase new HIV diagnoses by the tens of thousands, and have devastating consequences on our efforts to end the epidemic. GLAD is pleased to partner with the HIVMA, NASTAD, and the law firm Mintz to ensure that the Court of Appeals understands the devastating consequences for HIV prevention if the District Court’s decision stands.”

“The brief filed today by HIVMA and NASTAD underscores the fact that tens of thousands of American lives and billions of dollars of healthcare costs are literally in the balance with the outcome of this case,” said Drew DeVoogd, Member, Mintz. “Mintz is happy to work with GLAD, HIVMA, and NASTAD to highlight the massive human harm and economic cost the District Court’s decision will have if it is allowed to stand, eroding many years of hard-won public health progress in the fight against the HIV epidemic.”

Read the brief