Notícias

As members of the LGBTQ and Muslim communities in America, we are joined in solidarity, grief and outrage at the horrific attack that unfolded in Orlando on June 12. Our hearts, our thoughts and our prayers are with the victims, their families and the LGBTQ communities, particularly LGBTQ Latino communities.

In this moment of immense sadness and outrage, we stand together united against fear, hate and violence. We will not lose hope in the people and communities around us because we know we are stronger together.

In standing together, hand in hand, across every faith, we send a powerful message to those who seek to divide us using hatred and violence: love is stronger than hate and hope will defeat fear.

We draw our hope and our inspiration by the example set by hundreds of inspiring Floridians who lined up around city blocks in Orlando, answering the call to donate blood.

We draw our hope and our inspiration in the example set by brave first responders who ran into – not away from – harm to help the wounded and prevent further violence.

We draw our hope and our inspiration from the hundreds of interfaith vigils that have sprung up across the world with a clear message: love is stronger than hate.

In the days ahead there will be more calls to define an enemy. There will be cynical efforts to pit groups of Americans – many of whom share a history of being victims of suspicion and discrimination – against one another and to increase surveillance of entire communities, based solely on how they look or how they pray.

We stand united against these efforts to divide us. We are reminded that as our communities stand together, we are in fact one community – which includes LGBTQ Latinos and LGBTQ Muslims, who are targeted both as Muslims and as members of the LGBTQ community.

Now is the time for people of all faiths, sexual orientations, gender identities, and backgrounds, to come together and refuse to allow this tragic act of violence and hate to divide us.

We are stronger together, and together, we will move forward with love and acceptance for all.

Assinado,

American Civil Liberties Union LGBT Project
American Muslim Advisory Council (AMAC)
American Muslim Health Professionals
Arcus Foundation
Bisexual Resource Center
Center for Black Equity
Center for LGBTQ and Gender Studies in Religion
Centerlink: The Community of LGBT Centers
Coalition of South Florida Muslim Organizations (COSMOS)
Courage Campaign
Emerge USA
Federação da Igualdade
Igualdade Flórida
Faith Matters Network
Conselho de Igualdade Familiar
Garden State Equality
Gay Men’s Health Crisis (GMHC)
Georgia Association of Muslim Lawyers
GetEQUAL
Fundação Gill
FELIZ
Advogados e Defensores Legais GLBTQ (GLAD)
GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality
GLSEN
GSA Network – Genders & Sexualities Alliance Network
Campanha de Direitos Humanos
interACT: Advocates for Intersex Youth
Islamic Networks Group (ING)
Islamic Society of Central Jersey
Lambda Legal
Marriage Equality USA
Dr. Ingrid Mattson, Former President, Islamic Society of North America; Chair of Islamic Studies in the Faculty of Theology at Huron College at Western University
MECCA Institute
Projeto de Avanço do Movimento
Muslim Advocates
Muslim Alliance for Sexual and Gender Diversity (MASGD)
Muslim Bar Association of New York
Muslim Community Network
Muslim Justice League
Muslim Legal Fund of America
Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)
Muslim Wellness Foundation
Muslims for Progressive Values
Muslims Make it Plain
Muslims4peace.org
National Black Justice Coalition
Centro Nacional para os Direitos Lésbicos
Centro Nacional para a Igualdade Transgênero (NCTE)
National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs
Força-Tarefa Nacional LGBTQ
New Jersey Muslim Lawyers Association
New Ways Ministry
NMAC
Defensores do ambiente de trabalho Out & Equal
PFLAG Nacional
Pride at Work
Religious Institute
Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE)
The National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
The New York City Anti-‐Violence Project
O Projeto Trevor
Trans People of Color Coalition
Trans United Fund
Transgender Law Center (TLC)
Universal Muslim Association of America
Evan Wolfson, Former President, Freedom to Marry
Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics, and Ritual (WATER)

Notícias

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

The open letter is also available in the following languages:

العربية | Espanhol

As U.S. government leaders continue to grapple with addressing gun violence-prevention following last weekend’s homophobic massacre at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, LGBTQ and gun violence-prevention advocates and activists are calling for more stringent checks to keep guns out of dangerous hands.

The Orlando tragedy, the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history, highlights how vulnerable LGBTQ communities are to hate-fueled violence, especially LGBTQ communities of color.

Hate violence has risen sharply in recent years, with a 20% increase in reported LGBTQ homicides in the U.S. between 2014 and 2015, according to a study released this week by The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP). Of the homicides reported last year, 62% were LGBTQ people of color.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) hate crime statistics tell us year after year that people are most frequently targeted for hate violence based on personal characteristics related to race, religion, and sexual orientation. According to The Williams Institute, gay men report being victims of violent hate crimes at a higher rate than any other targeted group, and these crimes are more violent and result in hospitalization more often.

And yet we cannot ignore the fact that transgender people are at great risk of being victims of hate violence because of their gender identity and this reality is even worse for those who are also targeted on the basis of their race, ethnicity, class, and citizenship status. Fifty four percent of all hate-violence related LGBTQ homicides were transgender women of color, according to the NCAVP study.

We recognize the need to address the bigotry that motivates acts of violence toward LGBTQ people, and we also recognize that such violence is far more deadly when carried out with firearms.

Any solutions to the problem of hate violence, including anti-LGBTQ violence, must address the alarmingly easy access that bigots have to such deadly weapons. For example, under current law, people convicted of violent hate crimes can legally buy and possess guns. This is unacceptable.

With each new massacre, most recently the one in Orlando, we hope the number of homicides has pushed Americans over the threshold of tolerance for hatred fueled by people who seek to divide the country; for weak gun laws that arm those with hate in their hearts; and for the more than 90 victims of gun killings nationwide each day, affecting people of all backgrounds, sexual orientations, and gender identities.

Assault-style weapons, like the Sig Sauer MCX rifle used in Sunday’s Pulse nightclub shooting, can be purchased legally in the state of Florida without a background check – as long as the purchase is made from an unlicensed seller.

Eighteen states have already taken steps to close this dangerous “unlicensed sale loophole.” But in the remaining states, including Florida, anyone can buy a gun from an unlicensed seller with no background check, no questions asked.

Under current U.S. federal law, people on terror watch lists can legally buy guns, exploiting this “terror gap.” Since 2004, more than 2,000 terror suspects have taken advantage of this loophole. But we also recognize how this screening mechanism has the dangerous potential to profile specific communities on the basis of their actual or perceived race, religion, national origin, and other attributes.

Orlando is the sixth mass shooting in the U.S. since January 2009 to be investigated as an act of terrorism by the FBI. Americans are 25 times more likely than people in other developed countries to fall victim to a gun homicide.

The federal background check system established in 1994 by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act has blocked more than 2.6 million gun sales to prohibited purchasers at licensed dealers; however, an estimated 40% of gun sales across the U.S. take place without a background check, primarily at gun shows and online.

We urge Congress to make a start towards stronger protections against gun violence nationwide by enacting laws to:

1. Prevent known and suspected terrorists and those convicted of violent hate crimes from legally buying guns.

2. Ensure that criminal background checks are required on all gun sales, including online and at gun shows.

Assinado,

Listed alphabetically as of June 16, 2016

AIDS Alabama
Americans for Responsible Solutions
The Arcus Foundation
Athlete Ally
Auburn Theological Seminary
Believe Out Loud
BiNet USA
Bisexual Resource Center
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence United with The Million Mom March
Campaign To Unload
Congregation Beit Simchat Torah
Fundação David Bohnett
Equality Alabama
Federação da Igualdade
Igualdade Flórida
Equality Illinois
Equality New Mexico
Igualdade na Carolina do Norte
Equality Pennsylvania
Everytown for Gun Safety
Fair Wisconsin
Faith in America
Conselho de Igualdade Familiar
Freedom to Work
Gay Men’s Health Crisis
FELIZ
Advogados e defensores jurídicos GLBTQ
GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality
GLSEN
GroundSpark/The Respect for All Project
GSA Network – Genders & Sexualities Alliance Network
International Imperial Court System
Lambda Legal
LPAC
National Black Justice Coalition
Centro Nacional para os Direitos Lésbicos
Centro Nacional para a Igualdade Transgênero
National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
Força-Tarefa Nacional LGBTQ
NMAC: National Minority AIDS Council
National Religious Leadership Roundtable
New York City Anti-Violence Project
One Colorado
Open and Affirming Coalition of the United Church of Christ
Defensores do ambiente de trabalho Out & Equal
OutServe-SLDN
Pride at Work
Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE)
Stonewall National Museum & Archives
Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund
O Projeto Trevor
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries
Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual (WATER)

Notícias

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

The open letter is also available in the following languages:

العربية | Espanhol | Français

We the undersigned organizations working on the front lines of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) movement share in the profound grief for those who were killed and many more who were wounded during Latin Night at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. Their lives were lost or forever altered in this devastating act of violence targeting LGBTQ people. Our hearts go out to all the family and friends touched by this horrific act. We know their lives will never be the same again.

This national tragedy happened against the backdrop of anti-LGBTQ legislation sweeping this country and we must not forget that in this time of grief. Unity and an organized response in the face of hatred is what we owe the fallen and the grieving. Collective resolve across national, racial and political lines will be required to turn the tide against anti-LGBTQ violence. Our response to this horrific act, committed by one individual, will have a deep impact on Muslim communities in this country and around the world. We as an intersectional movement cannot allow anti-Muslim sentiment to be the focal point as it distracts from the larger issue, which is the epidemic of violence that LGBTQ people, including those in the Muslim community, are facing in this country.

The animus and violence toward LGBTQ people is not news to our community. It is our history, and it is our reality. In 1973, 32 LGBTQ people died in an arson fire at an LGBTQ Upstairs Lounge in New Orleans. More than forty years later, similar acts of anti-LGBTQ violence are commonplace. Crimes motivated by bias due to sexual orientation and gender identity were the second largest set of hate crimes documented by the FBI in 2015 (over 20 percent). Murders and violence against transgender people globally have taken more than 2000 lives over the last nine years. Bias crimes against US immigrant populations, which include significant numbers of LGBTQ people, have increased over the past decade as anti-immigrant rhetoric has escalated.

For those of us who carry multiple marginalized identities, the impact of this violence and discrimination has even more severe consequences. These intersectional identities and their ramifications are apparent at every level in the Orlando tragedy, which disproportionately affected Latino/a members of our communities, and has xenophobic consequences that threaten LGBTQ Muslims. According to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP), there were 24 reports of hate violence related homicides in 2015, and 62% of those victims were LGBTQ people of color. Transgender and gender nonconforming people made up 67% of the homicides, the majority of whom were transgender women of color. The violence against transgender and gender nonconforming people has continued into 2016 with 13 reported individual homicides this year alone. NCAVP research on hate violence shows that LGBTQ people experience violence not only by strangers, but also in their everyday environments by employers, coworkers, landlords and neighbors. The Orlando shooting is simply an extreme instance of the kind of violence that LGBTQ people encounter every day.

As LGBTQ people who lived through the AIDS crisis, we know what it looks like and feels like to be scapegoated and isolated in the midst of a crisis that actually requires solidarity, empathy and collaboration from all quarters. We appeal to all in our movement and all who support us to band together in rejecting hatred and violence in all its shape shifting forms. Let us stand united as a diverse LGBTQ community of many faiths, races, ethnicities, nationalities and backgrounds.

Assinado,

Arcus Foundation
Believe Out Loud
BiNet USA
Bisexual Resource Center
Center for Black Equity, Inc.
CenterLink: The Community of LGBT Centers
The Consortium of Higher Education LGBT Resource Professionals
The Council for Global Equality
Courage Campaign
Federação da Igualdade
Conselho de Igualdade Familiar
Freedom for All Americans
Freedom to Work
Advogados e Defensores Legais GLBTQ (GLAD)
Gay Men’s Health Crisis
The Gill Foundation
FELIZ
GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality
GLSEN
Genders & Sexualities Alliance Network
The Harvey Milk Foundation
Campanha de Direitos Humanos
interACT: Advocates for Intersex Youth
The Johnson Family Foundation
Lambda Legal
MAP
Marriage Equality USA
Muslim Alliance for Sexual and Gender Diversity
National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs
National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
National Black Justice Coalition
Centro Nacional para os Direitos Lésbicos
Centro Nacional para a Igualdade Transgênero
National Council of La Raza
Força-Tarefa Nacional LGBTQ
National Minority Aids Council (NMAC)
Aliança Nacional Queer da Ásia e das Ilhas do Pacífico
The New York City Anti-Violence Project
Defensores do ambiente de trabalho Out & Equal
OutRight Action International
The Palette Fund
PFLAG Nacional
Pride at Work
Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE)
Southerners on New Ground (SONG)
SpeakOUT Boston
The T*Circle Collective
Tarab NYC
Transgender Education Network of Texas
Trans People of Color Coalition
Centro de Direito Transgênero
O Projeto Trevor
The Williams Institute

Notícias

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

We stand in solidarity with the LGBTQ community of Florida. Our solemn thoughts are with those who have died and those who were injured and traumatized. Our hearts go out to the families and friends who have suffered senseless loss.

Those looking for resources, wishing to help, or for information please visit:

www.WeAreOrlando.org

Igualdade Flórida

Donate to support the victims and families

Community Statements

LGBTQ Groups Call For Unity in the Wake of Orlando Shooting

Muslim-LGBTQ Unity Statement in Response to Divisive Rhetoric After Orlando Shooting

LGBTQ Latinx Groups and Allies Reaffirm Resolve to End Violence Against Marginalized Communities

LGBTQ and Gun Violence-Prevention Groups Call for Disarming of Terror Following Orlando Shooting

Notícias

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

GLAD has joined the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Transgender Law Center in a letter urging the Obama administration to clarify that laws such as North Carolina’s HB2 violate federal laws that prohibit sex discrimination, including both Title VII and Title IX, and should put federal funding at risk for states that adopt them:

[W]e have seen an unprecedented number of bills in state legislatures this year that target people for discrimination based on their sexual orientation and gender identity… The administration would significantly aid efforts to repeal HB 2 – as well as prevent the passage of similar legislation in other states both this year and into the future – by providing clarity that such measures violate federal laws against sex discrimination and, as a result, jeopardize a state’s entitlement to significant federal funds.

“Transgender people are under attack across the country. These laws put their safety and their liberty at risk,” said GLAD Executive Director Janson Wu. “Now’s the time for the federal government to step up and use the tools it has to stop these attacks.”

Read the full letter

Blogue

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

É difícil prever o que nos aguarda para a composição do Tribunal. O Tribunal claramente encerrará este mandato sem um novo, o nono Juiz.

Mesmo antes da morte do Juiz da Suprema Corte Antonin Scalia, em 13 de fevereiro de 2016, todos os olhares estavam voltados para o Tribunal, para o que prometia ser um mandato de sucesso. Na pauta do Tribunal, há casos importantes envolvendo redistritamento, sindicatos de funcionários públicos, direito ao voto, imigração, aborto e cobertura de contraceptivos pelo Obamacare.

Mas com a morte do Juiz Scalia, o Tribunal subitamente se vê operando com apenas oito membros, e possíveis empates em muitos desses casos. Um empate significa que a decisão da instância inferior se mantém – mas não estabelece um precedente. Em alguns casos, isso seria uma boa notícia, e em outros, é claro, seria ruim. Por exemplo, quando os sindicatos de funcionários públicos previam uma perda grave, o Tribunal se dividiu em 4-4 no caso, o que significa que uma decisão do Tribunal de Apelações dos EUA favorável aos sindicatos – e seu direito de cobrar contribuições básicas de todos os funcionários – se manterá. (Em outro exemplo, a argumentação oral no caso de cobertura de contracepção sugeriu fortemente uma divisão de 4-4. No entanto, logo após a argumentação, o Tribunal emitiu uma ordem solicitando que as partes apresentassem memoriais sobre a viabilidade potencial de uma maneira alternativa para o pedido de isenção das entidades religiosas ser tratado. Parece claro que o Tribunal está buscando uma solução que evite o empate e forneça uma solução nacional para esta controvérsia.) Uma área de trabalho da GLAD sempre foi a participação em memoriais amicus curiae (amigo do tribunal) na Suprema Corte. No entanto, desde a vitória da nossa comunidade no Tribunal em Obergefell – bem como o envolvimento da GLAD impulsionando a estratégia de amicus curiae em Obergefell e no caso Windsor, que anulou a DOMA – a GLAD e as organizações jurídicas LGBT têm sido procuradas particularmente para opinar em casos como amigos do tribunal. Somos vistos como tendo perspectivas a oferecer com base em nossos sucessos recentes em mudar a lei até a Suprema Corte. Embora nenhum dos casos na pauta do Tribunal neste semestre seja específico da comunidade LGBTQIA+, vários abordam questões que nos preocupam claramente. Aqui estão quatro exemplos de casos em que o GLAD se envolveu de diversas maneiras no esforço de amicus curiae: Fisher v. Texas: Este é o caso de ação afirmativa em que a candidata branca à faculdade de direito Abigail Fisher contestou a fórmula usada pela Universidade do Texas em Austin para garantir um corpo estudantil diverso. O caso foi apresentado pela primeira vez ao Tribunal em 2013, quando a Suprema Corte reverteu uma decisão favorável à Universidade e o enviou de volta para reconsideração ao 5º Circuito. O 5º circuito confirmou novamente o programa de ação afirmativa da Universidade do Texas, e a Suprema Corte concedeu novamente a revisão. Os argumentos foram ouvidos em dezembro de 2015. (Este caso está sendo ouvido por apenas sete juízes porque a juíza Kagan se recusou. Portanto, este caso não está em perigo ou em um voto de empate.) O National Women's Law Center contatou a GLAD e a Lambda Legal sobre a colaboração em seu amicus curiae sobre diversidade como uma forma de quebrar estereótipos e aprimorar o funcionamento das instituições educacionais. O resumo examina, entre outras coisas, a "teoria do contato intergrupal", na qual há estudos extensivos envolvendo pessoas LGBTQIA+ (com base em estudos anteriores sobre raça), mostrando que o contato intergrupal reduz o preconceito. O resumo argumenta que as disparidades raciais e étnicas podem ser reduzidas quando os estereótipos são confrontados com a realidade – os contatos diários e as diferentes perspectivas oferecidas por estudantes de diferentes origens – com foco específico em mulheres negras e pessoas LGBTQIA+ não brancas. Saúde Integral da Mulher v. Cole: Neste caso tão importante, o estado do Texas impôs novas, extensas e onerosas exigências aos provedores de serviços de aborto. Nossos colegas do Centro Nacional para os Direitos das Lésbicas (NCLR) lideraram um memorando, que a GLAD assinou, argumentando que, quando liberdades fundamentais estão em jogo, os tribunais DEVEM examinar cuidadosamente as justificativas apresentadas pelo estado, especialmente aquelas envolvendo saúde e segurança, e não as tomar como certas. O Texas afirma que os tribunais devem acatar os julgamentos implícitos ou explícitos feitos pelo legislativo sobre essas questões. Nosso resumo, que foi assinado por grupos de justiça racial e equidade em saúde, bem como por grupos LGBTQ, detalha como pessoas de cor, mulheres e pessoas LGBTQ sofreram perdas de liberdade com base em justificativas supostamente científicas. Apontamos para a noção pseudocientífica de que a mistura de raças resultou em meninos "doentios e efeminados"; que não deveria haver mulheres advogadas, mulheres bartenders, professoras grávidas – porque a "ciência" mostrou que as mulheres não eram adequadas para essas funções; e que pessoas LGBTQ têm "personalidades psicopáticas", o que resultou em institucionalizações, proibições de professores, deportações, etc. O resumo apresenta um argumento muito convincente, com esses exemplos, de que, quando os tribunais são confrontados com ameaças às liberdades, o tribunal é obrigado a questionar as justificativas apresentadas. E o resumo termina observando que os tribunais aprenderam essa lição nos últimos anos, como a disposição da Suprema Corte em desmascarar, por exemplo, as diversas noções sobre os perigos da paternidade/maternidade de pessoas gays, quando a Corte derrubou a DOMA e, em seguida, estendeu o direito fundamental ao casamento a todos os cidadãos. (Este caso poderia terminar em um empate de 4 a 4, o que manteria as novas restrições do Texas em vigor, mas estabeleceria a lei apenas no Texas, Louisiana e Mississippi.) EUA x Texas: Este caso de imigração envolve tanto pessoas indocumentadas com filhos que são cidadãos americanos quanto pessoas indocumentadas que entraram nos Estados Unidos ainda crianças. As políticas do governo Obama de DAPA (Ação Diferida para Pais de Americanos) e DACA (Ação Diferida para Chegadas na Infância) expandidas impediriam a deportação dessas categorias de pessoas e a dissolução de famílias. A implementação do DAPA e do DACA, contestada por 26 estados, foi interrompida por um tribunal distrital federal no Texas, e essa ordem foi mantida pelo Quinto Circuito. No final do ano passado, o governo federal recorreu do caso à Suprema Corte. Principalmente por uma questão de solidariedade, o GLAD se uniu a uma coalizão de 326 grupos de imigração, direitos civis, trabalhistas e de serviços sociais em um amicus curiae que conta muitas histórias de partir o coração de pessoas que estão nessa situação e que estão fazendo contribuições valiosas para as comunidades em que vivem nos EUA (Este é outro possível empate de 4 a 4, mas com um impacto devastador. Isso significaria efetivamente que o mandato do presidente Obama expiraria sem nenhum avanço nos objetivos importantes dessas políticas.) VL v. EL: Para finalizar com uma nota positiva, a Suprema Corte emitiu uma decisão muito importante neste caso de adoção em março deste ano. Trata-se do caso em que uma mãe biológica tentou invalidar a adoção de seus filhos por seu ex-parceiro. As mulheres, residentes no Alabama, mudaram-se temporariamente para a Geórgia para que pudessem realizar adoções com segunda mãe (não permitidas no Alabama). Obtiveram sucesso, e a família voltou a morar no Alabama – agora com as crianças tendo dois pais legais. Posteriormente, quando o casal se separou e a mãe biológica tentou restringir o contato entre as crianças e a outra mãe, a mãe não biológica buscou reparação judicial com base na adoção. O tribunal de primeira instância e o tribunal de apelação intermediário concordaram com ela, mas a Suprema Corte do Alabama (liderada pelo infame Roy Moore) ficou feliz em obrigar a mãe biológica e declarar a adoção na Geórgia contrária à lei da Geórgia e, como tal, não sujeita a respeito e execução no Alabama. Após este caso ter sido apresentado no Supremo Tribunal (chamado de petição para um writ of certiorari), o advogado da mãe não biológica (NCLR e Jenner & Block) pediu à GLAD que apresentasse um amicus curiae em apoio à petição. (Está a tornar-se mais comum apresentar memoriais como o amicus curiae que redigimos na fase de petição de certidão, instando o tribunal a ouvir o caso. Pode ser uma maneira de chamar a atenção do Tribunal para o seu caso quando é um dos milhares que chegam ao Tribunal e onde o Tribunal ouve apenas 70-80 casos a cada período.) Acontece que este caso foi "fácil" para o Tribunal. Não concedeu revisão; ordenou briefing; e marcou o caso para discussão oral. Simplesmente reverteu sumariamente e por unanimidade a decisão da Suprema Corte do Alabama, instruindo-a a seguir precedentes legais bem estabelecidos que exigem que cada estado dê plena fé e crédito às sentenças emitidas pelos tribunais de Estados irmãos. (A morte do Juiz Scalia obviamente não fez diferença em como este caso foi resolvido, embora talvez fosse interessante ver se ele teria quebrado a unanimidade do Tribunal.) É difícil prever o que nos aguarda para a composição do Tribunal. O Tribunal claramente terminará este período sem um novo, o nono Juiz. Olhando para o próximo mandato, que se reúne na primeira segunda-feira de outubro de 2016, se os republicanos do Senado continuarem com sua promessa de que somente o próximo presidente poderá indicar alguém para preencher a vaga do juiz Scalia, provavelmente não teremos um nono juiz para o próximo mandato da Corte também. Isso ocorre porque uma indicação feita em fevereiro de 2017 pelo novo presidente dificilmente será confirmada, mesmo em um Senado quase favorável, em menos de três meses. Nesse ponto, a Corte terá ouvido a argumentação oral em todos os seus casos para o mandato de 2016-2017. A Corte pode lidar com isso: (1) aceitando menos casos até que as coisas se resolvam (algo que eles já mostram sinais de fazer); (2) ordenando uma nova argumentação nos casos em que eles estão divididos igualmente; (3) reorganizando o calendário de casos a fim de adiar casos sérios e controversos o máximo possível; e (4) trabalhando, como parece no caso da cobertura contraceptiva, para encontrar compromissos que evitem um empate. Quanto à atual nomeação de Merrick Garland para substituir o Juiz Scalia, se eu tivesse que prever, diria que não haverá audiências no Senado nem votação de confirmação pelo menos até depois das eleições de novembro, e muito possivelmente nem mesmo depois. Mas prever é provavelmente uma tarefa tola, considerando que as coisas em Washington estão tão voláteis neste momento.

U.S. v Texas

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

June 23, 2016: A disappointing 4-4 tie from the Supreme Court in this case, which means that the Fifth Circuit’s nationwide injunction against DAPA and expanded DACA remains in place by default.

GLAD joined a coalition of 326 immigration, civil rights, labor, and social service groups in filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Texas, urging the court to lift the injunction that blocked the executive actions on immigration that President Obama announced in November 2014.

The Obama administration’s expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program as well as a new Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) initiative were stopped by a federal district court in Texas, and that court’s order subsequently was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The lawsuit against the president’s executive actions was brought by 26 states. Late last year the federal government appealed the case to the Supreme Court.

Notícias

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

In an important victory for families, the U.S. Supreme Court today reversed the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision in which it refused to recognize a lesbian mother’s Georgia adoption of her three children.

“GLAD congratulates our colleagues at NCLR and especially the plaintiff and her children,” said Mary Bonauto, GLAD Civil Rights Project Director. “The Supreme Court has recognized, as we argued in our amicus curiae, that the ties between parent and child are paramount, especially for the child’s sense of security and safety in the world. We thank our friends at Foley Hoag for helping us to make that argument.”

GLAD and Foley Hoag LLP submitted an amicus brief to the Court on behalf of Equality Alabama Foundation, Equality Federation, Georgia Equality, the Human Rights Campaign, Immigration Equality, the National Black Justice Coalition, the National Center for Transgender Equality, the National LGBTQ Task Force, PFLAG, the Stonewall Bar of Georgia, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Whole Women’s Health v. Cole

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

On June 27, 2016 the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the draconian restrictions that the state of Texas had imposed on abortion providers in 2013.

GLAD and a coalition of 13 other LGBT, racial justice, and health equity organizations filed an amicus brief in Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole asking the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down draconian restrictions on abortion providers enacted by the State of Texas in 2013. If upheld, the restrictions would have led to the closing of most abortion clinics in the state.

The brief urged the Court to carefully scrutinize the state’s asserted justification for the law, as the Court has done with other laws that infringe upon fundamental freedoms. The State of Texas has argued that the law protects the health of women seeking abortion, but the evidence at trial showed just the opposite. Medical organizations such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Medical Association, and the American Public Health Association have explained that the restrictions imposed by the new law are medically unnecessary and endanger, rather than advance, women’s health.

Pseudo-science has been used throughout American history to exclude individuals and groups from the full protection of essential constitutional liberties, including laws barring interracial marriage, excluding women from certain professions, permitting the forced sterilization of those deemed “inferior,” and criminalizing and discriminating against LGBT people. GLAD and its fellow amici urge the Court to look to this history and fulfill its constitutional obligation to examine carefully the State’s asserted justifications for restricting women’s fundamental right to reproductive autonomy.

In addition to GLAD, the organizations filing the brief are the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, the Equal Justice Society, the National Black Justice Coalition, the Family Equality Council, the Human Rights Campaign, the National LGBTQ Task Force, GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality, Equality Federation, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, Immigration Equality, the National Health Law Program, Movement Advancement Project, and Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom.

Notícias

Lar » Nacional/Federal » Page 47

GLAD and a coalition of 13 other LGBT, racial justice, and health equity organizations have filed an amicus curiae em Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole asking the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down draconian restrictions on abortion providers enacted by the State of Texas in 2013. If upheld, the restrictions would lead to the closing of most abortion clinics in the state.

The brief urges the Court to carefully scrutinize the state’s asserted justification for the law, as the Court has done with other laws that infringe upon fundamental freedoms. The State of Texas has argued that the law protects the health of women seeking abortion, but the evidence at trial showed just the opposite. Medical organizations such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Medical Association, and the American Public Health Association have explained that the restrictions imposed by the new law are medically unnecessary and endanger, rather than advance, women’s health.

“Spurious medical claims lead only to mischief and certainly cannot justify governments infringing on people’s constitutionally-protected liberties,” said Mary L. Bonauto, GLAD’s Civil Rights Project Director. “We urge the Court to give due scrutiny to the health claims asserted by the state of Texas in supporting this injurious law which, if allowed to stand, will cause great harm to millions of women in the state for no public benefit.”

In addition to GLAD, the organizations filing the brief are the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the Equal Justice Society, the National Black Justice Coalition, the Family Equality Council, the Human Rights Campaign, the National LGBTQ Task Force, GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality, Equality Federation, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, Immigration Equality, the National Health Law Program, Movement Advancement Project, and Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom.