GLAD 訴訟考驗川普撤銷《平價醫療法案》對跨性別醫療保障的立場

「川普政府對第1557條的新解讀與《平價醫療法案》相悖，對跨性別者構成危險，並且經不起聯邦的挑戰，」GLBTQ法律倡導者和捍衛者組織表示。 GLAD目前正在聯邦法院就根據《平價醫療法案》中的非歧視法規（即第1557條）拒絕向一名跨性別男性提供醫療服務的行為提出質疑。

潘伯恩訴阿森德這是 GLBTQ 法律倡導者和捍衛者 (GLAD) 代表一名被拒絕性別肯定治療保險的跨性別男子提起的聯邦訴訟，將檢驗川普政府推翻衛生與公眾服務部 (HHS) 一項規定的合法性，該規定此前明確規定跨性別者受到 ACA 的非歧視條款（即第 1557 條）的保障。除其他指控外，該案指控 Alexander Pangborn 的雇主違反了 ACA，明確排除了跨性別者與性別轉換相關的醫療需求的保險保障。

《平價醫療法案》第1557條禁止在醫療保健和保險方面基於性別、種族、膚色、國籍、年齡和殘疾進行歧視。美國衛生與公眾服務部發布了最終規則今天正式確認川普政府的說法，即第 1557 條並不保護跨性別者免受醫療保健歧視，推翻了衛生與公眾服務部先前對該法律的解釋。

“川普政府的新1557規則與該法規相矛盾。它違反了既定的判例法，對跨性別者構成危險，並且無法經受住法律挑戰，” 珍妮佛·萊維（Jennifer Levi），GLAD跨性別者權利計畫總監“不幸的是，這項新規可能會讓醫護人員、保險公司和雇主感到困惑，並導致醫療服務提供者拒絕跨性別者尋求基本醫療服務。這又是一個冷酷無情的政策，出自一個一心想安撫極右翼、無視健全法律和醫療政策的政府。”

“亞歷山大·潘伯恩是一名臨終關懷護士，他每天為病人及其家人提供富有同情心的護理，但他卻被拒絕獲得他自己所需的醫療服務，” Chris Erchull，GLAD 律師，代表 Pangborn《平價醫療法案》旨在確保美國人能夠獲得醫療保健。第1557條中反歧視保護條款的目的和法律意義，是為了確保像亞歷山大這樣的人不會因為反跨性別偏見或其他歧視而被拒絕接受醫療服務。川普政府對這些保護條款的否定既殘酷又不公正，在法庭上站不住腳。

閱讀 GLAD 反對該規則的評論.

Advocacy Groups Urge NCAA to Remove Events from Idaho

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

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.

Click here 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.

真摯地，

國家跨性別平等中心
美國公民自由聯盟
Leadership Conference on Civil and
全國婦女法律中心
American Association of University Women
運動員盟友
Atlanta Pride Committee
Billie Jean King Leadership Initiative
Center for American Progress
Center for Disability Rights
CenterLink：LGBT中心社區
Clearinghouse on Women’s Issues
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
加州平等組織
平等聯盟
北卡羅來納州平等組織
德州平等組織
家庭平等
Feminist Majority Foundation
芬威健康
FORGE, Inc.
Freedom for All Americans
GLBTQ 法律倡議者和捍衛者 (GLAD)
GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
人權運動
Inclusion Playbook
Japanese American Citizens League
JustUs Health
Lambda 法律
法律之聲
LGBTQ Allyship
Lou Weaver Consulting
馬佐尼中心
美國少數族裔退伍軍人協會
美國現代軍事協會
全國黑人正義聯盟
全國女同性戀權利中心
全國LGBT健康聯盟
National Education Association
國家平等行動小組
全國 LGBTQ 工作小組
全國婦女與家庭夥伴關係
Oasis Legal Services
OCA-Asian Pacific American Advocates
一個科羅拉多
OutNebraska
全國親友會
Planned Parenthood Federation of America
SAGE: Advocacy and Services for LGBT Elders
Silver State Equality-Nevada
SPLC Action Fund
特雷弗計劃
The Volunteer Lawyers Project of Onondaga County, Inc.
跨性別法律辯護與教育基金
新墨西哥州跨性別資源中心
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

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.

部落格

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

LGBTQ+ 平等工作與種族正義工作密不可分，白人 LGBTQ+ 人士參與反種族主義工作至關重要。

6 月 9 日，LGBTQ+ 運動的白人與 LGBTQ #BlackLivesMatter 市政廳由佛羅裡達平等組織主辦的現場對話重點關注白人挑戰系統性種族主義和白人至上主義以及追究權力體系責任的責任和機會。

YouTube #!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=161#!trpen#影片#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

講者：

Shannon Minter，他/他，國家女同性戀權利中心
Rea Carey，她/他們，全國 LGBTQ 工作小組
Mary Bonauto，她/她的 GLBTQ 法律倡導者和捍衛者 (GLAD)
莫妮卡·邁耶（Monica Meyer），她或任何人，OutFront Minnesota
伊恩·帕爾姆奎斯特（Ian Palmquist），他/他，平等聯盟

點擊此處獲取更多資源

此次活動由 GLAD、GLSEN、全國女同志權利中心、全國 LGBTQ 工作小組、OutFront Minnesota 和平等聯盟共同主辦。

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

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

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

Fill out my online form.

LGBTQ Organizations Unite to Combat Racial Violence

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

“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.

部落格

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

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:

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

TRANSCRIPT:

>> Hi, I’m here with GLAD attorney Jennifer Levi to talk about case, 富爾頓訴費城市, that the United States Supreme Court will hear next term. Hi Jennifer, thanks so much for joining me today. I’ve heard 富爾頓 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 富爾頓, 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 富爾頓 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)

部落格

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

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!

Register for the exclusive online briefing.

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

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

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 和 NCLR 回應美國海軍授予跨性別軍官豁免權，該軍官起訴挑戰軍事禁令

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

美國海軍昨晚宣布，根據實施一年多的跨性別軍人禁令，首次授予一名跨性別軍人豁免權。

GLBTQ 法律倡導者和捍衛者 (GLAD) 和國家女同性戀權利中心 (NCLR) 3 月代表海軍軍官提起訴訟已獲得豁免。政府原定下週對該訴訟作出回應。

“該禁令已實施一年多，這是首次獲得豁免，” 珍妮佛·萊維（Jennifer Levi），GLAD跨性別者權利計畫總監「雖然我們很高興我們的客戶，一位高素質的海軍軍官，能夠繼續服役，但還有其他同樣符合條件的跨性別軍人，儘管身體狀況完全適合服役，卻也申請了豁免，目前仍處於不確定狀態。盡職盡責的軍人不應該為了繼續服役而提起訴訟。”

「沒有任何依據要求跨性別軍人尋求豁免才能繼續服役，而其他人則無需獲得豁免才能繼續服役，」他說。 Shannon Minter，NCLR 法律總監“雖然我們為客戶感到欣慰，但要求跨性別服役人員經歷這種歧視性的考驗毫無道理，只會凸顯禁令的不合理性。跨性別身份與一個人是否適合服役無關，跨性別者應該與其他服役人員遵守相同的標準。”

“我們為‘水手號’和豁免僵局的突破感到欣喜，” SPART*A 總裁 Emma Shinn該組織倡導積極服役的跨性別軍人、退伍軍人及其家人。 “我希望這只是眾多行動中的第一步；但鬥爭遠未結束。”

點擊此處了解更多案例信息.

訊息

家 » 國家/聯邦 » Page 33

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.