The Supreme Court’s Wednesday night 5-4 order allowing Texas SB8 to stay in effect has essentially banned access to abortion care in the country’s second largest state. This is an exceptionally cruel law, which flagrantly violates the Constitution and long-standing federal precedent. It will hurt women, LGBTQ people, and families across Texas, and particularly poor people and people of color who do not have the ability to travel out of state. Safe, accessible reproductive healthcare – including abortion care – is a matter of racial, economic, and gender justice and we must all be in the fight to repeal or reverse this ban and stop the erosion of the constitutionally protected human right to reproductive choice.
Những trải nghiệm bị quấy rối và lạm dụng tình dục mà nhiều phụ nữ mô tả trong báo cáo của Tổng Chưởng lý New York Leticia James về cuộc điều tra của văn phòng bà đối với Thống đốc Andrew Cuomo thật đáng chê trách. Sự ra đi của Cuomo hôm nay là một bước tiến quan trọng trong việc giải trình trách nhiệm, hy vọng sẽ bắt đầu mang lại công lý cho những người phụ nữ đã dũng cảm lên tiếng.
Là một tổ chức LGBTQ, chúng tôi cam kết hỗ trợ và hành động đoàn kết với những người sống sót và báo cáo viên về lạm dụng, đồng thời đấu tranh chống lại nạn phân biệt giới tính và kỳ thị giới tính vốn nuôi dưỡng những hành vi lạm dụng đó. Nhiều thành viên của cộng đồng LGBTQ đã và đang bị ảnh hưởng bởi quấy rối tình dục, phân biệt đối xử dựa trên giới tính và tấn công tình dục. Đây là những vấn đề của chúng tôi.
Câu chuyện xoay quanh văn phòng thống đốc New York một lần nữa cho thấy việc ngăn chặn quấy rối tình dục và thay đổi các cấu trúc cũng như thái độ dung túng cho hành vi này đòi hỏi nhiều hơn là chỉ truy cứu trách nhiệm từng cá nhân một. Báo cáo của Tổng Chưởng lý không chỉ nêu bật hành vi của thống đốc mà còn nêu bật văn hóa và môi trường làm việc khuyến khích sự đồng lõa và im lặng thay vì minh bạch. Văn hóa đó đã thể hiện theo những cách cực kỳ tai hại bên trong văn phòng thống đốc, dẫn đến việc né tránh và tìm cách trả thù những người khiếu nại quấy rối thay vì giải quyết các mối quan ngại được nêu ra, đồng thời hướng tới công lý và thay đổi.
Sự chú ý của công chúng đối với vụ việc này không chỉ mang đến cơ hội cho những kẻ duy trì văn hóa đó trong văn phòng thống đốc New York nhìn nhận lại những gì đã xảy ra, mà còn cho tất cả chúng ta cùng cam kết làm tốt hơn. Công cuộc cải cách các thể chế đang dung túng cho nạn quấy rối và phân biệt đối xử tình dục tràn lan không được kiểm soát là một quá trình lâu dài và khó khăn, nếu không có những giải pháp dễ dàng và ngắn hạn.
Nó đòi hỏi phải lắng nghe, hỗ trợ và tập trung vào những trải nghiệm của những người sống sót. Điều này đòi hỏi luật pháp nghiêm ngặt và việc thực thi luật pháp một cách đầy đủ và công bằng. Nó đòi hỏi đào tạo nhất quán và đầy đủ trong các tổ chức và cơ quan, chính sách thiết lập lộ trình báo cáo rõ ràng, và giám sát để đảm bảo các lộ trình đó dễ tiếp cận và được tuân thủ. Nó đòi hỏi ý chí cải tổ văn hóa thể chế, vốn cho phép và khuyến khích những cá nhân có quyền lực phớt lờ, che đậy hoặc duy trì hành vi phân biệt đối xử và quấy rối.
Điều này cũng đòi hỏi cam kết thay đổi văn hóa rộng lớn hơn. Chúng ta cần xem xét lại thái độ và hành vi kỳ thị phụ nữ của chính mình. Chúng ta cần hiểu và giải quyết vô số cách thức mà những thái độ và hành vi đó được thấm nhuần và củng cố bởi nền văn hóa nói chung. Chúng ta cũng cần tạo không gian để mọi người thừa nhận những thất bại và sự đồng lõa của họ trong các hệ thống đổ vỡ, để họ có thể trở thành một phần của giải pháp.
Sự thay đổi về mặt hệ thống và văn hóa cần có thời gian, nhưng chúng ta không được trì hoãn hoặc bỏ qua tính cấp bách của công việc trước mắt. Là một tổ chức cống hiến cho bình đẳng giới, công lý chủng tộc và bình đẳng hoàn toàn trong cộng đồng LGBTQ, chúng tôi cam kết nỗ lực hướng tới ngày mà tất cả mọi người, bao gồm cả phụ nữ, có thể sống và làm việc trong một nền văn hóa tôn trọng hoàn toàn nhân tính của họ.
Các nguồn lực được đề xuất cho những người bị quấy rối hoặc tấn công tình dục:
RAINN (Mạng lưới quốc gia về chống hiếp dâm, lạm dụng và loạn luân) các nguồn hỗ trợ về quấy rối tình dục, bao gồm thông tin về cách can thiệp với tư cách là người ngoài cuộc.
Liên minh quốc gia về các chương trình chống bạo lực: Một liên minh các chương trình ghi nhận và bảo vệ các nạn nhân của bạo lực/quấy rối chống cộng đồng LGBT và HIV/AIDS, bạo lực gia đình, tấn công tình dục, hành vi sai trái của cảnh sát và các hình thức ngược đãi khác. Trang web có danh sách các chương trình và ấn phẩm chống bạo lực tại địa phương. Đường dây nóng: 212.714.1141
Dự án Trevor: Hỗ trợ và phòng ngừa tự tử cho thanh thiếu niên LGBTQ. Đường dây nóng: 866.488.7386
Đường dây nóng quốc gia LGBT: Tổng đài liên hệ với hơn 15.000 nguồn lực trên toàn quốc hỗ trợ cộng đồng LGBTQ. Đường dây nóng: 888.843.4564
With the end of the transgender military ban earlier this year and the U.S. armed forces now embracing open service, today GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders and the National Center for Lesbian Rights have officially closed Doe kiện Trump, the first lawsuit challenging the ban.
GLAD and NCLR are immensely grateful to transgender servicemembers—past, present, and future—and all who fought to end the ban.
Background: Doe kiện Trump was filed in August 2017 following President Trump’s announcement that the U.S. military would no longer accept or allow transgender individuals to serve. The lawsuit asserted that the ban was unconstitutional and the policy was enacted to discriminate, not to serve any legitimate purpose, requesting the court keep the ban from taking effect while the case was being heard in court.
Join GLAD, NCTE, Và BAGLY for an evening of phone banking on September 16 to build support for the Equality Act!
Call voters in target states where Senators have not yet pledged to vote for the Equality Act. You’ll be asking them to leave a message for their Senator, and connecting them to the lawmaker’s office directly using a simple webpage. The process is simple to learn, the script is easy to follow, and getting folks pumped up about this critical legislation is fun!
JUST IN: Senator Elizabeth Warren will be joining us to kick off the phone bank with a special message!
Never done a phone bank before? It’s simple and straightforward:
Join us on Zoom for a short training, and we’ll stick around in case you have any questions
You’ll use a simple website that will connect you to voters without showing your phone number
You’ll have a script that includes what to say and helpful responses to potential questions
Connecting with the community and allies across the country can be fun and energizing!
If you happen to be connected to someone who doesn’t support the Equality Act, tell them to have a nice day – and just move on to the next call
To sign up:
Fill out the registration form below (select GLAD in the “Organization” menu)
Confirm your shift when you get the confirmation instructions
When Antwan Carter was on trial in a Massachusetts court, Black and LGBTQ jurors were improperly excluded from the jury. Black and Pink MA partnered with GLAD, the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Racial Justice, and Lambda Legal to argue to the Supreme Judicial Court that the discrimination in jury selection in Antwan Carter’s trial was not only unfair, it was unconstitutional.
For citizens of the United States, jury service is a pillar of participation in civic life. Much like voting, the right to serve on a jury is fundamental to understanding ourselves as Americans. Indeed, the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that everyone accused of committing a crime is entitled to a trial before “an impartial jury.” The right to a fair trial is constitutionally linked to the right to serve on a jury. As with voting rights, the rights tied to jury service are precarious and must be guarded. As always, it is often the most marginalized among us whose rights are at stake.
“When any large and identifiable segment of the community is excluded from jury service, the effect is to remove from the jury room qualities of human nature and varieties of human experience, the range of which is unknown and perhaps unknowable.”[1]
What Justice Thurgood Marshall articulated in 1972 after decades of litigation about race-based exclusions from jury service—that diversity among jurors is key to fair and effective deliberations—is an ongoing struggle today.
In 1966 attorneys Pauli Murray and Dorothy Kenyon briefed a case for the ACLU against the Jury Commissioner in Lowndes County, Alabama, on behalf of Gardenia White. Ms. White was a voting rights activist who was excluded from the juror rolls, both because she was a woman and because she was Black. At the time, Lowndes County excluded women from jury service by law and African Americans by practice.
Each a prominent pioneer of civil rights litigation, Murray and Kenyon understood that limiting the right to be a juror because of defining aspects of our personhood is a form of disenfranchisement. They won their case with legal arguments that highlighted the evil of intersectional discrimination in jury service.
The ACLU hoped the case would result in a Supreme Court ruling to establish sex as a protected classification under the Fourteenth Amendment. Still, Lowndes County wisely decided to change its policies rather than invite a lengthy public court battle by appealing the decision. Ruth Bader Ginsberg, at the time a lawyer with the ACLU, later credited Murray and Kenyon for the argument that ultimately applied equal protection to sex-based classifications in Reed v. Reed, even signing their names to the brief in deference to their ingenuity.
Courts have long recognized that a fair trial depends on an unbiased jury. If people are excluded based on sex, race, ancestry, or religion, the U.S. Constitution’s promise of an impartial jury of one’s peers is illusory. A venire, also known as a jury pool, cannot reflect a cross-section of the community if classes of citizens are systematically excluded from participation. As Thurgood Marshall explained, the exclusion of any class of people “deprives the jury of a perspective on human events that may have unsuspected importance in any case that may be presented.” [2]
Today, we are less likely to see the intentional exclusion of a class of people from a jury venire, but discrimination nevertheless persists in jury selection. When jurors are selected from the venire, attorneys are typically granted the right to dismiss some individuals from the panel by exercising a designated number of “peremptory strikes,” which the attorneys may exercise for any reason or no reason at all. The only limitation to that right is that an attorney may not strike a juror based on a protected trait.
Of course, proving trait-based discrimination against a prospective juror is a difficult task. Too often, prosecutors in criminal cases rely on that difficulty to gain an unfair advantage against defendants. Jurors of color are most frequently the target.
Prosecutors have an incentive to eliminate members of marginalized communities from juries. As a Ventura County District Attorney training document (initially cited in a California Attorneys for Criminal Justice and Hueston Hennigan LLP amicus brief from for Johnson v. California) confessed, “people who are marginalized by societal norms” should be viewed with caution by prosecutors because they are presumably more empathetic to the experience of other marginalized people, including criminal defendants.
As a result, courts have devised an imperfect process to ferret out discrimination in jury selection. An attorney may object when a juror is dismissed by opposing counsel. It is up to the judge to decide if it looks like potential discrimination is playing out. In this case, the judge may ask the dismissing attorney to provide a neutral justification for dismissing the juror. Then the judge must decide if the neutral reason is the pretext for discrimination.
In Antwan Carter’s trial, that process failed to prevent the exclusion of Black and LGBTQ jurors. When the defense attorney in Antwan Carter’s trial raised objections to the prosecutor’s strikes, the judge ruled that she could not inquire into the possibility of discrimination based on two incorrect and unacceptable justifications. First, she ruled that the presence of Black jurors on the panel meant that there was no pattern to imply race discrimination. This cannot be correct because a prosecutor cannot have a license to discriminate against jurors based on race just because he allowed some people of color to be seated on a jury. Second, the judge said there is no constitutional rule against LGBTQ discrimination. Surprisingly, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has not yet ruled definitively that sexual orientation and gender identity are protected classes under the state’s Declaration of Rights. It is past time for the Court to clarify that LGBTQ people are equal citizens whose rights are constitutionally protected from governmental discrimination.
As we wait to see if the Court will acknowledge this judge’s mistake and reverse the verdict against Antwan Carter, state legislatures across the country are considering and even passing laws aimed at further restricting voting rights. In a country where so many people don’t have a meaningful right to participate in civic life, either because of incarceration or prior conviction even if they have served their sentence has been served, or because of disability, or even blatant discrimination based on race or gender or sexual identity, we must remain vigilant as we continue to fight for full citizenship for everyone.
This year, too many legislatures and governors have given into fear and lies about transgender people. It sucks that we have to keep having this fight. But we can create a world that celebrates every young person for who they are.
At the beginning of Pride month this year, Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida signed a bill that excludes transgender girls from school sports. It was just one of the too many bills targeting transgender people signed into law this year.
While it is decades since I have lived in Florida, seeing the governor signing an anti-transgender law in the name of school children brought me right back to a painful moment in my own youth.
Teenage Jennifer Levi
I was 12 years old, just about to turn 13, and living in Miami Beach, Florida, in 1977 when Anita Bryant, the “orange juice queen,” spearheaded the Save Our Children campaign. That campaign was designed to overturn one of the country’s first gay rights ordinances, in Miami-Dade County, and it succeeded.
I remember crying the day I heard about the vote. It was overwhelming to learn that my neighbors voted for repeal by a 2:1 margin.
After the defeat of the Miami-Dade County ordinance, Save Our Children turned its efforts elsewhere and, within a year, overturned similar laws in St. Paul, Minnesota; Wichita, Kansas; and Eugene, Oregon. But the LGBTQ community in Florida and across the country organized and fought – and allies began to join us.
Save Our Children’s efforts were stopped in November 1978 when California voters rejected Proposition 6, or the Briggs Initiative, a proposed state law in California that would have banned openly gay teachers in public schools.
That history is the foundation of my professional life and the formative experience that would shape my connection to advocacy.
I recall sitting in typing class and hearing my teacher repeat what Bryant was saying about the danger of gay teachers in public schools. Only she used a much more offensive term – a six-letter F word – for gay men.
I remember that moment vividly to this day more than 40 years later. I knew, of course, she was speaking out against gay teachers. But more personally, I felt the clear and stinging message that my life, my trans, gender non-conforming, queer, soon-to-be lesbian self was also not, in her view, worthy of the dignity, humanity, and respect afforded to other students at Nautilus Junior High. And that hurt.
If I could speak to my 12-year-old self now, though, I would tell that young person: there will be remarkable changes ahead. And you will be a part of them.
But while we have made such positive advances, we are in this moment experiencing backlash, the likes of which make the Save Our Children campaign look almost moderate.
During this legislative session, we saw over 200 bills introduced in legislatures across the country. These bills seek to exclude transgender students from school programs, deny youth medical care for their most basic needs, and target transgender people for exclusion and demeaning treatment in places of public accommodation.
Antia Bryant, c.a. 1971
Transgender people and our families have had to endure hours of legislative discussion and testimony putting up for debate our most basic protections under civil rights laws. And newspapers have been filled with editorials calling into question who we are and how we should live.
Alongside Florida, the states of Mississippi, Arkansas, West Virginia, Montana, South Dakota, and Tennessee also enacted some of the most reactionary laws ever passed this legislative session. Many of these laws directly target transgender young people, and all of them impact trans youth as well as adults.
The Tennessee legislature was arguably the most aggressive in its attacks. Governor Lee signed five bills targeting transgender and LGB people, including a bill excluding transgender girls from school sports, one taking aim at healthcare for trans youth, a bill restricting transgender students’ access to school restrooms, and one prohibiting LGBTQ topics in school.
A final new Tennessee law – the first of its kind in the country – requires businesses in the state to post a demeaning and fear-mongering warning notice on their premises if they allow transgender individuals access equally to other patrons. The Tennessee legislature and governor have basically rolled out a giant “Not Welcome” sign to transgender people in the state.
But GLAD is fighting back. Partnering with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, attorney Abby Rubenfeld, and the law firm of Sherrard, Roe, Voigt, and Harbison, GLAD is challenging the sign law in federal court on behalf of Curb Records and the Mike Curb Foundation – Nashville-based companies speaking out because demeaning and excluding transgender people is counter to their values and also bad for business.
In an interesting twist of fate, our client in the case, Mike Curb, was on the front lines in California challenging the Briggs Initiative when I was a young teenager reeling from the impact of the Save Our Children campaign back in Florida. Mike, his family, and his company have been dedicated to full inclusion and equality for LGBTQ people for decades and it’s so important to have allied voices like his in this fight.
“Our foundation has been dedicated to inclusion and nondiscrimination, including for LGBT people, from day one. It is hard to believe that our LGBT community in Tennessee is being assaulted with so much harmful legislation, much of it being signed by Governor Lee, at a time when our country needs to come together more than ever before.” – Mike Curb, plaintiff in Curb v Lee.
Filing this Tennessee lawsuit gives me strength and hope. As a 12-year-old, there was less I could do to fight against the repeal efforts of the Miami-Dade gay rights ordinance. But I did what I could. And despite how hard it felt, then too there were experiences that gave me hope and glimpses of the better future that lay ahead.
San Francisco’s 1979 Gay Freedom Day Parade, c/o Chicago Tribune
One day, I went to a sign-making event at a restaurant located in a vibrant gay district called Cocoanut Grove. To set the scene just a bit, Cocoanut Grove had one of the first outdoor exercise courses popularized in the 70s, and it lay along a course that ran along the Miami Bay. I can now look back and think how powerfully affirming it was for me as a young, queer person just beginning to understand who I was, to see strong butch lesbians (I am sure there were femme ones, too, but my eyes queued on the butch ones) and athletic, handsome gay men of many shapes, colors, and sizes sitting kissing on park benches or holding hands while rollerblading through the park.
That was the backdrop through which I walked that day from our car to the Coco Plum. In my hands was a bright orange poster board and an array of pink and black markers. My plan was to write a big sign that said – A Day without Human Rights is a Day without Sunshine – the slogan the movement had crafted as a play on Anita Bryant’s famous orange juice slogan, to call out the hypocrisy of Bryant and her team.
As I sat down at a table toward the rear of the restaurant, I saw someone I recognized. Seated at another table working on another sign was my science teacher, Mr. Wilson (not his real name). There were lots of rumors about Mr. Wilson being gay, but to me, they were just that – rumors. That day Mr. Wilson walked over to my table and said,
“I know kids talk. And I want you to know it’s true that I’m gay. I’m proud of it and willing to put it all on the line to make the world safer for teachers like me. But more than that, I want the world to be a safer place for young people to come out and not just be accepted but celebrated for who they are. I know that day will come. And we’ll all get there together. It’s sucks that we have to have this fight. But I don’t know any other way to it than through it.”
I can’t tell you how much it meant to hear his message that day. One thing we can all do in this moment is to be that person for the young queer and trans people in our lives – or even for the queer and trans kids halfway around the country who desperately need to hear an affirming message from us right now.
The queer community in Miami-Dade County lost the fight in 1977. But the struggle formed a local movement that connected eventually to a state and then a national one.
Having one teacher reach out to me and seeing so many adults standing up to bigotry and prejudice inspired and transformed my life and future.
This year too many legislatures and governors have given into fear and lies about transgender people. It sucks that we must keep having this fight. But like Mr. Wilson, I still believe we can create a world that celebrates every young person for who they are. And that’s worth fighting for.
2021 has been one of the worst years on record for anti-LGBTQ state legislation, particularly attacks on transgender youth. But even among all the (very) bad, we’ve had some legislative victories, seen the strength and resilience in our community, built momentum for federal nondiscrimination protections, and heard the powerful voices of leaders – both young and seasoned – who are leading the way forward.
Kiểm tra Justice HangOUT discussion with GLAD Executive Director Janson Wu and National Center for Transgender Equality Executive Director Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen about the impacts of this legislative year and what’s next in the fight for LGBTQ justice and equality. Moderated by Qwin Mbabazi, GLAD Community Engagement Manager.
Justice HangOUTs are free interactive online events featuring LGBTQ+ movement leaders to give you the information you need about the issues you care about, and an opportunity to ask your burning questions. Click here to watch past Justice HangOUTs.
June 30, 2021 (NASHVILLE) – Renowned independent record label Curb Records and the Mike Curb Foundation today đã đệ đơn kiện liên bang thách thức luật mới của Tennessee, HB 1182, yêu cầu các doanh nghiệp phải dán thông báo xúc phạm tại cơ sở kinh doanh của họ nếu họ có chính sách cho phép người chuyển giới vào cửa hàng một cách bình đẳng với những khách hàng khác.
Đơn khiếu nại khẳng định rằng HB 1182 – quy định kích thước cụ thể, màu đỏ và vàng, cùng ngôn ngữ cụ thể tương đương với biển báo “không chào đón” đối với khách hàng – đang tạo ra một môi trường thù địch đối với người LGBT trong tiểu bang và tước đi quyền tiếp cận bình đẳng của họ đối với các doanh nghiệp mở cửa cho công chúng cũng như các cơ hội việc làm và giáo dục. Curb Records và Mike Curb Foundation lập luận rằng luật này buộc họ và các doanh nghiệp khác ở Tennessee phải tạo ra một môi trường sợ hãi và không chấp nhận người LGBT, trái ngược với các giá trị của công ty về tính chính trực, tôn trọng sự đa dạng và không phân biệt đối xử.
“It’s outrageous to have the government come in and force me to send such a derogatory message to my employees and customers,” said Mike Curb, founder and Chairman of Curb Records and President of the Mike Curb Foundation. “My grandmother Eloisa Salazar faced incredible discrimination as she grew up on the Mexico-U.S. border, and her experience shaped my family’s and my company’s values. Our foundation has been dedicated to inclusion and nondiscrimination, including for LGBT people, from day one. It is hard to believe that our LGBT community in Tennessee is being assaulted with so much harmful legislation, much of it being signed by Governor Lee, at a time when our country needs to come together more than ever before.”
Grammy award-winning record producer Mike Curb started his career almost six decades ago in California and Curb Records has operated for the last three decades in Nashville, Tennessee. The company has launched the careers of numerous successful country, rock, pop, R&B, gospel and Christian rock artists. Curb Records and the Mike Curb Foundation have provided grants and gifts totaling more than $100 million in Tennessee in support of education, historic preservation, individuals facing homelessness, and a wide range of civic and charitable endeavors in local Tennessee communities. These projects include the Curb Center at Vanderbilt University, the Mike Curb College of Entertainment and Music Business at Belmont University, the Linda and Mike Curb Institute for Advanced Medical Education at St. Thomas Hospital, the Curb Institute for Music at Rhodes College in Memphis, the Fisk University Jubilee Chair, the Curb Victory Hall for homeless veterans and over 100 other Tennessee charities. The Curb entities also own and have restored multiple historic sites across Tennessee including Elvis Presley’s former home in Memphis, RCA Studio B, Columbia Studio A, the Quonset Hut, and the Johnny Cash Collection in Nashville as well as other historic buildings on Nashville’s Music Row.
Mike Curb’s long history in business, philanthropy, and government also includes serving as Acting Governor and elected Lieutenant Governor of California and President of the California state senate. He was a leader in the fight to stop California’s 1978 Briggs Initiative which would have banned gay schoolteachers. Mike Curb also served as co-chair of Ronald Reagan’s successful 1980 presidential campaign.
Curb Records and the Mike Curb Foundation are represented in their suit by Sherrard Roe Voigt & Harbison, attorney Abby Rubenfeld, the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD).
2021 has been one of the worst years on record for anti-LGBTQ state legislation, particularly attacks on transgender youth. But even amongst all the (very) bad, we’ve had some legislative victories, seen the strength and resilience in our community, built momentum for federal nondiscrimination protections, and heard the powerful voices of leaders – both young and seasoned – who are leading the way forward.
Join GLAD Executive Director Janson Wu and National Center for Transgender Equality Deputy Executive Director Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen for a Justice HangOUT to talk about the state of our movement, the highs and lows of 2021 so far, and what’s on the horizon in the fight for LGBTQ justice and equality.
This free virtual event is co-presented by GLAD and the National Center for Transgender Equality. ASL interpretation and captioning will be provided. Please RSVP below.
Justice HangOUTs are free interactive online events featuring LGBTQ+ movement leaders to give you the information you need about the issues you care about, and an opportunity to ask your burning questions. Click here to watch past Justice HangOUTs.
Statement on Supreme Court’s Ruling in Mahanoy v. B.L.
GLAD issued the following statement on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mahanoy v. B.L.:
“We’re pleased to see the Court take a thoughtful and nuanced approach to the complex issue of student speech,” said Patience Crozier, GLAD Senior Staff Attorney. “The Court recognized schools can have a need to regulate off-campus speech in various contexts, including bullying that contributes to a hostile school environment and harms other students. At the same time, today’s decision strongly reminds schools that they have no right to over-police out-of-school speech by students.”
GLAD joined an amicus brief filed in Mahanoy v. B.L. by the National Women’s Law Center and Lambda Legal. Noting potential repercussions in this case for students from historically marginalized backgrounds, including LGBTQ students and students of color, who experience disproportionate levels of both harassment and school discipline, the brief urged the Court to take a nuanced approach allowing schools to address bullying without granting an overly broad authority to punish off-campus speech.
Các phán quyết gần đây của Tòa án Tối cao đã đặt ra những câu hỏi cấp bách cho cộng đồng LGBTQ+ và người nhiễm HIV. Đường dây nóng tư vấn pháp lý của chúng tôi, GLAD Law Answers, có thể giúp bạn. Hãy liên hệ ngay hôm nay.
Tiếng Việt 
Español de México 
Português 
简体中文 
香港中文 
Français 
العربية 
Polski 
Русский 
Deutsch 
Kreyòl Ayisyen