National/Federal Know Your Rights - Page 33 of 59 - GLAD Law
Bỏ qua tiêu đề đến nội dung
GLAD Logo Bỏ qua Điều hướng Chính đến Nội dung

Tìm kiếm

Vụ kiện GLAD kiểm tra việc Trump đảo ngược các biện pháp bảo vệ chăm sóc sức khỏe cho người chuyển giới theo ACA

"Cách diễn giải mới của chính quyền Trump về Mục 1557 mâu thuẫn với Đạo luật Chăm sóc Sức khỏe Hợp túi tiền, gây nguy hiểm cho người chuyển giới và sẽ không thể vượt qua được thách thức từ phía liên bang", GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders cho biết. GLAD hiện đang tại tòa án liên bang để khiếu nại việc từ chối chăm sóc sức khỏe cho một người đàn ông chuyển giới theo luật chống phân biệt đối xử của ACA, được gọi là Mục 1557.

Pangborn kiện Ascend, một vụ kiện liên bang do GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) đệ trình thay mặt cho một người đàn ông chuyển giới bị từ chối bảo hiểm cho dịch vụ chăm sóc khẳng định giới tính, sẽ kiểm tra tính hợp pháp của việc chính quyền Trump đảo ngược quy định của HHS trước đây đã nêu rõ rằng người chuyển giới được bảo hiểm theo điều khoản không phân biệt đối xử của ACA được gọi là Mục 1557. Vụ kiện cáo buộc, cùng với các khiếu nại khác, rằng chủ lao động của Alexander Pangborn đã vi phạm ACA bằng cách loại trừ hoàn toàn bảo hiểm cho nhu cầu y tế của người chuyển giới liên quan đến chuyển đổi giới tính.

Mục 1557 của Đạo luật ACA cấm phân biệt đối xử trong việc tiếp cận dịch vụ chăm sóc sức khỏe và bảo hiểm dựa trên giới tính, chủng tộc, màu da, nguồn gốc quốc gia, độ tuổi và khuyết tật. Bộ Y tế và Dịch vụ Nhân sinh đã công bố một quy tắc cuối cùng hôm nay chính thức hóa tuyên bố của chính quyền Trump rằng Mục 1557 không bảo vệ người chuyển giới khỏi sự phân biệt đối xử trong chăm sóc sức khỏe, đảo ngược cách giải thích trước đây của HHS về luật này.

“Quy định 1557 mới của chính quyền Trump trái ngược với luật định. Nó trái với luật lệ hiện hành, gây nguy hiểm cho người chuyển giới và không thể vượt qua được thách thức pháp lý”, ông nói. Jennifer Levi, Giám đốc Dự án Quyền của Người chuyển giới GLAD. “Thật không may, quy định mới này có thể gây hoang mang cho các chuyên gia y tế, công ty bảo hiểm và người sử dụng lao động, đồng thời khuyến khích các nhà cung cấp dịch vụ từ chối người chuyển giới khi họ tìm kiếm dịch vụ chăm sóc y tế cơ bản. Đây lại là một chính sách vô cảm khác đến từ một chính quyền có ý định xoa dịu phe cực hữu và phớt lờ các chính sách pháp lý và y tế hợp lý.”

“Alexander Pangborn là một y tá chăm sóc giảm nhẹ, người cung cấp dịch vụ chăm sóc tận tình hàng ngày cho bệnh nhân và gia đình của họ, nhưng anh ấy lại bị từ chối quyền được chăm sóc sức khỏe mà bản thân anh ấy cần,” ông nói. Chris Erchull, Luật sư của GLAD đại diện cho Pangborn. “Mục đích của ACA là đảm bảo người Mỹ được tiếp cận dịch vụ chăm sóc sức khỏe. Mục đích và ý nghĩa pháp lý của các biện pháp bảo vệ chống phân biệt đối xử trong Mục 1557 là để đảm bảo những cá nhân như Alexander không bị từ chối chăm sóc vì định kiến chống người chuyển giới hoặc các thành kiến khác. Việc chính quyền Trump bác bỏ những biện pháp bảo vệ đó vừa tàn nhẫn vừa bất công. Điều này sẽ không có giá trị pháp lý tại tòa án.”

Đọc bình luận của GLAD được gửi để phản đối quy định này.

Advocacy Groups Urge NCAA to Remove Events from Idaho

June 10, 2020: GLAD and other advocacy groups signed onto a letter calling for the NCAA to remove events in Idaho in response to new anti-trans legislation. The letter can be found below, and the fully annotated version is available in PDF here.

Nhấp vào đây for sample social media posts to share, encouraging the NCAA to relocate their championship events from Idaho.

Dear NCAA Bid Selection Committees,

We are writing to request you relocate all NCAA events, including the 2021 NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship games, from Idaho due to the state’s recent passage of dangerous anti-transgender legislation that prohibits certain groups of student athletes from participating in school sports.

Given Idaho’s adoption of a discriminatory law that directly impacts college athletics, violates NCAA values, and undermines the dignity and well-being of NCAA athletes, Idaho schools no longer qualify to host NCAA events.

On March 30, 2020, Idaho enacted House Bill 500 (HB500), a law that bans transgender girls from competing on college teams, including at Idaho’s NCAA member schools. This law also forces women and girls to be subject to invasive medical procedures simply because they are, or are suspected to be, transgender. Idaho is the only state in the country with such an extreme, harmful, and discriminatory blanket ban on the participation of transgender women and girls in sports. This law is in direct conflict with NCAA Championship policies. In fact, Idaho’s law is so extreme that it prompted the NCAA to speak out against its passage.

Idaho’s law blatantly targets an already-marginalized community in athletics and decreases their participation in sports. Transgender students already participate at significantly lower rates and feel unsafe in athletic spaces. Further, while the harm of this law explicitly falls on transgender girls, the impact extends even further. Idaho’s new law is the first in the country to categorically ban transgender girls from sports statewide, but past research has found that when states adopt policies that create new barriers for transgender athletes to participate in sports, the number of participants in sports among all LGBTQ youth drops. This harms the NCAA’s goals of protecting athlete wellbeing and promoting diversity and inclusion in athletics.

As a law that expressly violates the NCAA’s values, HB500 disqualifies Idaho schools from hosting the seminal NCAA event. According to the NCAA’s anti-discrimination policy, the NCAA “must and shall operate [their] championships and events in alignment with [their] values as [they] strive to promote an inclusive atmosphere in which student-athletes participate…”. This includes NCAA Championship sessions, series, and final events. When North Carolina passed HB2 in 2016, the most extreme anti-LGBTQ law in the country at the time, the NCAA recognized that a law targeting transgender people’s access to restrooms went against their values, and subsequently relocated championship games from North Carolina.  Like HB2, HB500 strikes directly at the core of the NCAA’s values, going even further in excluding students from college athletics. All NCAA sponsored events therefore should be removed from Idaho immediately.

Further, Idaho should not be permitted to host an NCAA event while HB500 is in effect. With this sweeping discriminatory law in place, they simply cannot reflect NCAA values and treat all athletes with the dignity and respect expected of NCAA membership schools.

We appreciate the NCAA’s commitment to inclusion and anti-discrimination. In keeping with these values, we encourage you to take immediate action to ensure the integrity of NCAA events and the wellbeing of all athletes.

Sincerely,

  • Trung tâm Quốc gia về Bình đẳng Chuyển giới
  • Liên minh Tự do Dân sự Hoa Kỳ
  • Leadership Conference on Civil and
  • Trung tâm Luật Phụ nữ Quốc gia
  • American Association of University Women
  • Đồng minh vận động viên
  • Atlanta Pride Committee
  • Billie Jean King Leadership Initiative
  • Trung tâm Tiến bộ Hoa Kỳ
  • Center for Disability Rights
  • CenterLink: Cộng đồng các Trung tâm LGBT
  • Clearinghouse on Women’s Issues
  • Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
  • Bình đẳng California
  • Liên đoàn Bình đẳng
  • Bình đẳng Bắc Carolina
  • Bình đẳng Texas
  • Bình đẳng gia đình
  • Feminist Majority Foundation
  • Sức khỏe Fenway
  • Công ty FORGE
  • Tự do cho tất cả người Mỹ
  • Luật sư và Người bảo vệ GLBTQ (GLAD)
  • GLMA: Các chuyên gia y tế thúc đẩy bình đẳng LGBTQ
  • Chiến dịch Nhân quyền
  • Inclusion Playbook
  • Japanese American Citizens League
  • JustUs Health
  • Lambda Legal
  • Legal Voice
  • Đồng minh LGBTQ
  • Lou Weaver Consulting
  • Trung tâm Mazzoni
  • Minority Veterans of America
  • Hiệp hội Quân sự Hiện đại Hoa Kỳ
  • Liên minh Công lý Da đen Quốc gia
  • Trung tâm Quốc gia về Quyền của Người đồng tính nữ
  • Liên minh quốc gia vì sức khỏe LGBT
  • National Education Association
  • National Equality Action Team
  • Lực lượng đặc nhiệm LGBTQ quốc gia
  • National Partnership for Women & Families
  • Dịch vụ pháp lý Oasis
  • OCA-Asian Pacific American Advocates
  • Một Colorado
  • Ra khỏi Nebraska
  • PFLAG Quốc gia
  • Planned Parenthood Federation of America
  • SAGE: Advocacy and Services for LGBT Elders
  • Silver State Equality-Nevada
  • SPLC Action Fund
  • Dự án Trevor
  • The Volunteer Lawyers Project of Onondaga County, Inc.
  • Quỹ Giáo dục và Bảo vệ Pháp lý cho Người chuyển giới
  • Trung tâm Tài nguyên Chuyển giới của New Mexico
  • True Colors United
  • Whitman-Walker Health and Whitman-Walker Institute
  • Women’s Sports Foundation

 

The accompanying letter from student athletes is here: https://www.athleteally.org/student-athletes-ncaa-idaho
The accompanying letter from professional athletes is here: https://www.athleteally.org/athletes-ncaa-idaho

 

Take action by showing your support on social media!

Here are some sample social media posts for you to share:

Twitter:

I urge the @NCAA to relocate their championship events from Idaho, where lawmakers passed a bill banning transgender youth from playing high school sports. ALL young athletes should be able to play the sport they love and be part of a team. #SupportTransAthletes

Transgender student athletes simply want to play the sport they love and be a part of a team, just like any other student. That’s why I urge @NCAA to move their events from Idaho, which passed #HB500, banning trans youth from participating in high school athletics.

Facebook:

I’m standing up for ALL youth athletes—including those who are transgender, and simply want to play they love and be part of a team. Our laws should protect trans youth, not encourage discrimination against them. That’s why I’m urging the NCAA to relocate their championship events from Idaho, where lawmakers passed a bill banning trans youth from participating in high school athletics. I hope the NCAA continues to demonstrate their commitment to inclusion by taking swift action.

 

Blog

Công tác đấu tranh cho bình đẳng LGBTQ+ gắn liền chặt chẽ với công tác đấu tranh cho công lý chủng tộc, và điều quan trọng là người LGBTQ+ da trắng phải tham gia vào công tác chống phân biệt chủng tộc.

Vào ngày 9 tháng 6, những người da trắng làm việc trong phong trào LGBTQ+, hợp tác với Hội trường thị trấn LGBTQ #BlackLivesMatter do Equality Florida tổ chức, đã tổ chức một cuộc trò chuyện trực tiếp tập trung vào trách nhiệm và cơ hội mà người da trắng có để thách thức chủ nghĩa phân biệt chủng tộc có hệ thống và quyền tối cao của người da trắng và để buộc các hệ thống quyền lực phải chịu trách nhiệm.

YouTube #!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=159#!trpen#băng hình#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

DIỄN GIẢ:

  • Shannon Minter, Anh ấy/anh ấy, Trung tâm Quốc gia về Quyền của Người đồng tính nữ
  • Rea Carey, cô ấy/họ, Lực lượng đặc nhiệm LGBTQ quốc gia
  • Mary Bonauto, Luật sư và Người bảo vệ GLBTQ (GLAD)
  • Monica Meyer, cô ấy hoặc bất kỳ ai, OutFront Minnesota
  • Ian Palmquist, anh ấy/anh ấy, Liên đoàn Bình đẳng

Nhấp vào đây để biết thêm tài nguyên

Sự kiện này được đồng tổ chức bởi GLAD, GLSEN, Trung tâm quốc gia về quyền của người đồng tính nữ, Lực lượng đặc nhiệm LGBTQ quốc gia, OutFront Minnesota và Liên đoàn bình đẳng.

LGBTQ+ Community Dismantling White Supremacy: White People Engaging White People

Work for LGBTQ+ equality is inextricably linked to work for racial justice.

That work could not be more urgent.

GLAD invites you to attend a virtual town hall discussion on how white people can work for racial justice in and beyond the LGBTQ community.

RSVP and more info below

Điền vào của tôi biểu mẫu trực tuyến.

LGBTQ Organizations Unite to Combat Racial Violence

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” Those words, written over 30 years ago by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, remind us that indifference can never bridge the divide of hate. And, today, they should serve as a call to action to all of us, and to the Movement for LGBTQ equality.

This spring has been a stark and stinging reminder that racism, and its strategic objective, white supremacy, is as defining a characteristic of the American experience as those ideals upon which we claim to hold our democracy — justice, equality, liberty.

  • We listened to the haunting pleas of George Floyd for the most basic of human needs — simply, breath — as a Minneapolis police officer kneeled with cruel indifference on his neck.
  • We felt the pain of Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend as he called 9-1-1 after plainclothes Louisville police kicked down the door of their home and shot her eight times as she slept in her bed.
  • We watched the shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery by white vigilantes in Brunswick, GA, aware that they evaded the consequence of their actions until the video surfaced and sparked national outrage.
  • We saw the weaponizing of race by a white woman who pantomimed fear in calling the police on Christian Cooper, a Black gay man bird-watching in Central Park.
  • We have heard and read about the killings of transgender people — Black transgender women in particular — with such regularity, it is no exaggeration to describe it as a epidemic of violence. This year alone, we have lost at least 12 members of our community: Dustin Parker, Neulisa Luciano Ruiz, Yampi Méndez Arocho, Monika Diamond, Lexi, Johanna Metzger, Serena Angelique Velázquez Ramos, Layla Pelaez Sánchez, Penélope Díaz Ramírez, Nina Pop, Helle Jae O’Regan, and Tony McDade.

All of these incidents are stark reminders of why we must speak out when hate, violence, and systemic racism claim — too often with impunity — Black Lives.

The LGBTQ Movement’s work has earned significant victories in expanding the civil rights of LGBTQ people. But what good are civil rights without the freedom to enjoy them?

Many of our organizations have made progress in adopting intersectionality as a core value and have committed to be more diverse, equitable, and inclusive. But this moment requires that we go further — that we make explicit commitments to embrace anti-racism and end white supremacy, not as necessary corollaries to our mission, but as integral to the objective of full equality for LGBTQ people.

We, the undersigned, recognize we cannot remain neutral, nor will awareness substitute for action. The LGBTQ community knows about the work of resisting police brutality and violence. We celebrate June as Pride Month, because it commemorates, in part, our resisting police harassment and brutality at Stonewall in New York City, and earlier in California, when such violence was common and expected. We remember it as a breakthrough moment when we refused to accept humiliation and fear as the price of living fully, freely, and authentically.

We understand what it means to rise up and push back against a culture that tells us we are less than, that our lives don’t matter. Today, we join together again to say #BlackLivesMatter and commit ourselves to the action those words require.

SIGNED:

Affirmations, Dave Garcia, Executive Director

AIDS Foundation of Chicago, Aisha N. Davis, Director of Policy

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director

Arkansas Transgender Equity Collaborative, Tonya Estell, Board of Directors

Campaign for Southern Equality, Rev. Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, Executive Director

Cathedral Of Hope UCC, Rev. Dr. Neil G Thomas, Senior Pastor

Center on Halsted, Modesto Valle, CEO

Equality Arizona, Michael Soto, Executive Director

Equality California, Rick Chavez Zbur, Executive Director

Equality Delaware, Mark Purpura and Lisa Goodman, Board Chairs

Equality Federation, Rebecca Isaacs, Executive Director

Equality Florida, Nadine Smith, Executive Director

Equality Illinois, Brian Johnson, CEO

Equality New Mexico, Adrian N. Carver, Executive Director

Equality New York, Amanda Babine, Executive Director

Equality North Carolina, Kendra R Johnson, Executive Director

Equality Ohio, Grant Stancliff, Communications Director

Equality Texas, Ricardo Martinez, CEO

Fair Wisconsin, Megin McDonell, Executive Director

Fairness Campaign, Tamara Russell, Board Member

Family Equality, Denise Brogan-Kator, Chief Policy Officer

Freedom for All Americans, Kasey Suffredini, CEO & National Campaign Director

FreeState Justice, Mark Procopio, Executive Director

Gay City: Seattle’s LGBTQ Center, Fred Swanson, Executive Director

Gay Men’s Health Crisis (GMHC), Kelsey Louie, CEO

Georgia Equality, Jeff Graham, Executive Director

GLAAD, Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), Janson Wu, Executive Director

GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality, Hector Vargas, Executive Director

GLSEN, Eliza Byard, Executive Director

GSAFE, Brian Juchems, Co-Director

Human Rights Campaign, Alphonso David, President

Immigration Equality, Aaron C. Morris, Executive Director

Ingersoll Gender Center, Karter Booher, Executive Director

Lambda Legal, Kevin Jennings, CEO

LGBT Community Center of the Desert, Mike Thompson, CEO

LGBT Life Center, Stacie Walls, CEO

Louisiana Trans Advocates, Peyton Rose Michelle, Director of Operations

Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition, Tre’Andre Valentine, Executive Director

MassEquality, Tanya V. Neslusan, Executive Director

Movement Advancement Project, Ineke Mushovic, Executive Director

National Black Justice Coalition, David Johns, Executive Director

National Center for Lesbian Rights, Imani Rupert-Gordon, Executive Director

National Center for Transgender Equality, Mara Keisling, Executive Director

National LGBTQ Task Force, Rea Carey, Executive Director

NMAC, Paul Kawata, Executive Director

Oakland LGBTQ Community Center, Joe Hawkins, CEO

Out & Equal Workplace Advocates, Erin Uritus, CEO

One Colorado, Daniel Ramos, Executive Director

One Iowa, Courtney Reyes, Executive Director

OutFront Minnesota, Monica Meyer, Executive Director

OutNebraska, Abbi Swatsworth, Executive Director

Pacific Center for Human Growth, Michelle Gonzalez, Executive Director

PFLAG National, Brian K. Bond, Executive Director

PRC, Brett Andrews, CEO

Rainbow Community Center of Contra Costa County, Kiku Johnson, Executive Director

Resource Center, Cece Cox, CEO

Sacramento LGBT Community Center, David Heitstuman, CEO

San Francisco Community Health Center, Lance Toma, CEO

SF LGBT Center, Rebecca Rolfe, Executive Director

SAGE, Michael Adams, CEO

San Diego LGBT Community Center, Cara Dessert, CEO

Silver State Equality, André C. Wade, State Director

Tennessee Equality Project, Chris Sanders, Executive Director

The Diversity Center, Sharon E Papo, Executive Director

The Gala Pride and Diversity Center, Michelle Call, Executive Director

The Lesbian, Gay Bisexual and Transgender Community Center, Glennda Testone, Executive Director

The LGBTQ Center, Long Beach, Porter Gilberg, Executive Director

The LGBTQ Center, NYC, Reg Calcagno, Senior Director of Government Affairs

The Trevor Project, Amit Paley, CEO

Transgender Education Network of Texas (TENT), Emmett Schelling, Executive Director

Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (TLDEF), Andy Marra, Executive Director

TransOhio, James Knapp, Chair & Executive Director

Uptown Gay & Lesbian Alliance (UGLA), Carl Matthes, President

Wyoming Equality, Sara Burlingame, Executive Director

 

Click here to view this letter as a PDF.

Blog

As the new Supreme Court term begins, the issues we care about are already front and center at the nation’s highest court.

One case, Fulton vs. City of Philadelphia, scheduled for oral argument on November 4, could have sweeping ramifications for our community.

Watch GLAD’s Transgender Rights Project Director Jennifer Levi explain what the case is about and what’s at stake:

YouTube #!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=159#!trpen#băng hình#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

LEARN MORE AND STAY UP-TO-DATE ABOUT THE CASE

 

BẢN SAO:

>> Hi, I’m here with GLAD attorney Jennifer Levi to talk about case, Fulton v. Thành phố Philadelphia, that the United States Supreme Court will hear next term. Hi Jennifer, thanks so much for joining me today. I’ve heard Fulton is an important case for the LGBTQ community. Can you tell me a little bit about it?

>> Yeah, sure. This is a case in which Catholic Social Services sued after the City of Philadelphia ended its contract with them because the agency refused to work with same-sex couples who wanted to become foster parents.

It’s a case like so many we’ve seen where a religiously-based organization is asking to be exempted from non-discrimination laws. You probably remember a case from 2018 brought against a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Many of us expected that case, Masterpiece Cake Shop, to be the one where the Supreme Court would decide whether religiously owned businesses get a pass on complying with non-discrimination laws. But Masterpiece Cake didn’t turn out to be that case. Instead with Justice Kennedy as the swing vote the Court decided the case narrowly, avoiding the larger legal question. That makes Fulton, the case the Court has now taken up the first to be heard on the issue since Justice Kavanaugh replaced Justice Kennedy.

>> Okay then. Wow. That makes it sound pretty important. What else can you tell me about it?

>> Catholic Social Services is one of about 30 agencies – almost all religious – that contracts with Philly to do foster placements. And after the City learned that Catholic Social Services wouldn’t work with married same-sex couples, it ended their contract. And Catholic Social Services sued. They lost in the trial court. They lost in the appeals court. And now they’re making their case to the Supremes. GLAD is part of a national team strategizing to make sure this case doesn’t end up gutting the non-discrimination laws that are so important to so many people.

>> I can surely see why this is an important case for couples in the Philadelphia area who want to become foster parents. But what makes it so important for everyone else?

>> That’s a great question. I mean there are a number of issues in the case but probably most significant for the LGBTQ community is one that pits Philly’s non-discrimination requirement against Catholic Social Services free exercise claim. But we should probably back up a little bit.

Under well settled precedent, laws that don’t specifically target religious entities and applied equally to everyone, religious and non-religious people alike, are presumptively constitutional. The court calls those neutral laws of general applicability. The court says that they would stand constitutional challenge even if they have some incidental impact on a person’s religious practices. And this isn’t some progressive idea. It’s based on a case called Smith that was decided by Justice Antonin Scalia decades ago. The reason so many eyes are on Fulton now is because it’s a case where the new conservative majority could change the law in a way that would allow substantially more discrimination against LGBTQ people and others in a wide variety of contexts. It’s been a goal of the Religious Right to do this basically since Smith was decided.

>> But doesn’t our constitution provide special protections for people to be able to follow their religious beliefs? I mean what’s so wrong with that?

>> Well sure our Constitution does say that you can’t target religious beliefs for a particular hostile treatment by the government. But that’s not what non-discrimination laws do. Far from it. And what Justice Scalia reasoned in Smith was that allowing a person to do whatever they want based on their religious beliefs would basically mean that every person becomes a law unto themselves and that would undermine the rule of law and create chaos.

You also have to remember that this is a case about the conditions a city like Philly gets to put on its spending. I mean the city is basically just saying if you want to get government money you can’t discriminate against LGBTQ people. Seems pretty straightforward when you think of it that way.

>> Yeah I guess it does. So how big a deal is this case anyway?

>> That depends on where the court lands on how far it extends its analysis. At the far end a decision in the case could allow pretty much any religious entity to refuse to provide services to anyone and it can also force government at all levels to fund discriminatory groups. Pretty scary really.

>> Wow. I see that. I mean, so many people rely on government services for food, housing, health care, and so much more. Are you saying people could be turned away from housing shelter just because they’re gay?

>> That’s certainly possible if the court overturns the Smith precedent. It might even mean that private businesses could do that. The implications are seriously far-reaching.

>> Okay wow. I’m really just trying to take this all in. The case sounds seriously important. Thanks for talking to me about it. Definitely sounds like something all of us who care about non-discrimination should follow closely. I’ll make sure to keep checking GLAD’s website regularly so I can keep up on this case and so many more that I know will make a big difference in my life and the lives of so many people I care about. Thanks again and I hope you’ll come back and talk to me again sometime.

>> You bet I will. Any time.

(Video recorded in May 2020)

Blog

Jennifer Levi, GLAD’s Transgender Rights Project Director, explains the Supreme Court cases that will decide whether LGBTQ workers are legally protected from discrimination. The Court will rule any day now – sign up to hear as soon as they do and learn directly from GLAD experts what the decision means to you!

YouTube #!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=159#!trpen#băng hình#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

Register for the exclusive online briefing.

Dee Farmer, the First Transgender Plaintiff in a Supreme Court Case, Mourns the Passing of Aimee Stephens

Dee Farmer, the First Transgender Plaintiff in a Supreme Court Case, Mourns the Passing of Aimee Stephens

Dee Farmer, the first transgender plaintiff to bring a case before the United States Supreme Court, issued the following statement in response to the death of Aimee Stephens, a transgender woman whose employment discrimination case is currently pending before the Supreme Court:  

“I am saddened by the passing of Aimee Stephens, my sister in faith and love. Yet my heart is filled with warmth knowing that her voice will continue to be heard through her case in the Supreme Court. May this fact comfort us all.”

Dee Farmer’s litigation began in 1989, when she filed a federal lawsuit to hold prison officials responsible for failing to protect her from being sexually assaulted in a federal prison in Indiana, where she was housed with male inmates. Farmer’s case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which issued a landmark opinion in 1994 holding that prisoners have a right to be protected from sexual violence and that Farmer could seek damages from the officials who had placed her in danger.

The Court’s decision, Farmer v. Brennan, has been cited by thousands of courts. Farmer’s case was also a major catalyst for the Prison Rape Elimination Act, which was enacted by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush into law in 2003.

Farmer, who has spent decades incarcerated, was released on May 10, just a day before Aimee Stephen’s death on May 11, 2020.

“As we await the Supreme Court’s decision in Aimee Stephen’s historic case, it is important to remember the decades of advocacy that made this moment possible,” said Shannon Minter, a transgender man who serves as the legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. “Dee Farmer is a legend in the transgender rights movement. This June will mark the twenty-sixth anniversary of her groundbreaking victory, which marked the first time the Supreme Court had a chance to learn about the struggles faced by transgender people. In the decades since, Dee’s courage has inspired countless other advocates to educate legislatures and courts about the humanity of transgender people and their urgent need for basic legal protections.”

“Few individuals have made as big a difference in the lives of others as Dee Farmer,” said Jennifer Levi, the Director of the Transgender Rights Project at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, and co-counsel with NCLR in several cases challenging Trump’s transgender military ban. “The transgender movement has made tremendous progress since Dee brought her case, and we owe no small part of it to her courage and foresight.”

In 2019, Farmer was featured in an award-winning documentary, Where Justice Ends, which tells the story of her arrest for a non-violent crime, the horrific treatment she endured while incarcerated, and the lawsuit that changed the law of the land.

In the past two years, Farmer has consulted with NCLR to help guide its advocacy on behalf of other transgender prisoners. Currently, NCLR represents Adree Edmo, a transgender woman incarcerated in Idaho. Last year, a federal district court ordered the prison to provide Ms. Edmo with medically necessary care to treat her gender dysphoria. The Ninth Circuit affirmed that decision, and Idaho has asked the Supreme Court to take the case.

“Our movement owes a huge debt of gratitude to Dee Farmer and the many other Black transgender women who have led the way in fighting for justice and dignity for all people,” said Imani Rupert-Gordon, who joined NCLR as its Executive Director in March. “NCLR is committed to honoring Dee’s legacy and to continuing the work that she and others began, and we will not rest until every transgender person can live safely and freely, and until the horrific violence and mistreatment that too many transgender prisoners still endure is at an end.”

GLAD and NCLR Respond to US Navy Granting Waiver to Transgender Officer Who Sued to Challenge Military Ban

The U.S. Navy announced last night that it has granted the first waiver to a transgender service member under the transgender military ban which has been in effect for more than a year.

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) filed suit in March on behalf of the Naval Officer who has been granted the waiver. The government was due to file its response to the suit next week.

“The ban has been in place for over a year and this is the first waiver to be granted,” said Jennifer Levi, Giám đốc Dự án Quyền của Người chuyển giới GLAD. “While we are relieved that our client, a highly qualified Naval officer, will be able to continue her service, there are other equally qualified transgender service members who have sought waivers and are still in limbo, despite being perfectly fit to serve. Dedicated military service members shouldn’t have to bring a lawsuit to be able to continue doing their job.”

“There is no basis for treating transgender service members differently by requiring them to seek a waiver that no one else has to obtain in order to continue to serve,” said Shannon Minter, Giám đốc Pháp lý của NCLR. “While we are relieved for our client, requiring transgender service members to jump through this discriminatory hoop makes no sense and only underscores the irrationality of the ban. Being transgender has nothing to do with a person’s fitness to serve, and transgender individuals should be held to the same standards as other service members.”

“We are ecstatic both for the Sailor and the breach of the waiver logjam,” said Emma Shinn, president of SPART*A, which advocates for actively serving transgender military members, veterans, and their families. “I am hopeful that this is the first of many; but the fight is far from over.”

Click here to learn more about the case.

Tin tức

GLAD Executive Director Janson Wu issued the following statement on the death of Aimee Stephens, whose landmark transgender status employment discrimination case is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court:

“We are deeply saddened by the news of Aimee Stephens’ death. Our hearts go out to Aimee’s wife, Donna, their daughter Elizabeth, and all who loved her.

All of us owe Aimee a debt of gratitude. Her decision to speak out and challenge the discrimination she faced at a job she had loved for years demonstrated true courage. Her willingness to publicly share her story and to persist in her fight all the way to the Supreme Court has already made a tremendous difference to transgender people across the country.

Aimee’s life reminds us that at the center of every civil rights case is a human story, an individual who made the choice to try and change things for themselves and for all of us. Today we celebrate Aimee’s life and thank her and her loved ones for the gift they gave our community.”

Aimee Stephens’ case, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court and concerns the question of whether transgender workers are protected from discrimination under Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act.

viTiếng Việt
en_USEnglish es_MXEspañol de México pt_PTPortuguês zh_CN简体中文 zh_HK香港中文 fr_FRFrançais arالعربية pl_PLPolski ru_RUРусский de_DEDeutsch htKreyòl Ayisyen viTiếng Việt
Được cung cấp bởi  Tuân thủ Cookie GDPR
Tổng quan về quyền riêng tư

Trang web này sử dụng cookie để chúng tôi có thể mang đến cho bạn trải nghiệm người dùng tốt nhất có thể. Thông tin cookie được lưu trữ trong trình duyệt của bạn và thực hiện các chức năng như nhận diện bạn khi bạn quay lại trang web của chúng tôi và giúp đội ngũ của chúng tôi hiểu được những phần nào trên trang web mà bạn thấy thú vị và hữu ích nhất.