Connect with us

National

LGB adults half as likely to have guns than heterosexuals: report

Non-Hispanic whites more likely to keep firearms in home

Published

on

guns, gay news, Washington Blade

‘Gun violence is a major public concern, and violence against LGBT people is all too common,’ said Adam Romero of the Williams Institute.

An estimated 18.8 percent of lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States say they have guns in their home compared to 35.1 percent of heterosexuals, according to a recently released study by the Williams Institute, an LGBT think tank associated with the UCLA School of Law.

Among other things, the study found that LGB adults are more likely than their heterosexual peers to support gun control laws or regulations such as background checks. It also found that among both LGB and heterosexual adults, non-Hispanic whites were more likely to have a gun in their home than people of other races and nationalities.

And, in what may be viewed as an interesting gender role variation, among LGB respondents, 17.3 percent of males and 19.9 percent of females — a statistically insignificant difference — reported having guns in their home.

By contrast, 42.2 percent of heterosexual males reported having guns in their home compared to 30.8 percent of heterosexual females, a finding, according to the study, that shows an approximate 10 percent gender gap in guns in the home between straight men and women.

“Gun violence is a major public concern, and violence against LGBT people is all too common,” said the study’s co-author Adam P. Romero, director of Legal Scholarship and Federal Policy at the Williams Institute.

“But we know little from a research perspective about how guns are used against and by LGBT people,” Romero said in a statement. “Given high rates of suicide attempts among LGBT people, comparable rates of intimate partner violence, and elevated risk of other interpersonal violence, it is critical to gather more data about the extent to which guns are present at these moments.”

The Williams Institute says its study is based on an analysis of two U.S. national surveys of gun ownership and attitudes toward gun control policies conducted by two other organizations that asked respondents to identify their sexual orientation but not their gender identity.

“Data about gun ownership and attitudes toward gun control among transgender adults have not yet, to our knowledge, been collected,” the study says.

One of the two surveys from which it based its findings is an annual nationally representative survey of adults known as the General Social Survey (GSS), which monitors social characteristics and attitudes of Americans. The Williams Institute says its study used data collected by the relatively small GSS survey sample each year from 2008 to 2016 to obtain a statistically significant sample of LGB respondents.

The Williams Institute says the other source of data for its study is the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey, an online attitudinal survey of U.S. adults weighted to reflect the larger U.S. adult population. That survey included results from a total of 55,121 respondents, 50,942 of whom self-identified as heterosexual and 4,179 self-identified as LGB.

The Williams Institute study’s findings are outlined and analyzed with multiple tables of data in a 21-page reported entitled, “Gun Violence and LGBT Adults: Findings from the General Social Survey and the Cooperative Congressional Election Survey.”

Although the findings focus solely on LGB people, the study provides an overview of current research on gun violence that impacts the entire LGBT community, including the transgender community, which is why the study’s title includes the “T,” according to Williams Institute spokesperson Rachel Dowd.

A summary released by the Williams Institute includes what it considers some of the study’s key findings:

• Controlling for age, race and regional distribution, heterosexual men were more likely to have guns in the home than gay and bisexual men.

• Among LGB adults, women and men had comparable rates of guns in the home (19.9% and 17.3% respectively).

• Among both LGB and heterosexual adults, non-Hispanic whites were more likely to have a gun in their home than other races/ethnicities.

• LGB adults were somewhat more likely to favor laws that would require people to obtain a police permit before they could buy a gun compared to heterosexuals (81.4 % and 73.9 percent respectively).

• Among LGB adults, there is strong support for background checks (93.3%) and opposition to making it easier to obtain concealed weapon permits (73.3%).

• In a “conclusion and recommendations” section the study says federal and state crime data reporting, which mostly does not include sexual orientation and gender identity data, should be changed to include such data.

“SOGI [sexual orientation and gender identity] measures are not included on death certificates; nor are they included in the administrative systems that track injury, or on the core demographic sections of the Uniform Crime Reports, or all relevant population based surveys,” the report says.

“The report finds that LGB people have fewer guns in the home; and from a harm reduction standpoint, when there is less access to guns, the risk of death by suicide and homicide decrease,” said Brian Malte, executive director of the Hope and Heal Fund, which funded the study.

“Yet, there is a dearth of information on how gun violence affects LGBT people,” Malte said in a statement. “We are excited to learn more about how to fill these gaps in knowledge through this important project.”

The report can be accessed at williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

Trans rights supporters, opponents rally outside Supreme Court as justices consider Tenn. law

Oral arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti case took place Wednesday

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

At least 1,000 people rallied outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday as the justices considered whether a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth is unconstitutional.

Dueling rallies began early in the morning, with protesters supporting trans rights and protesters supporting Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care each stationed with podiums on opposite sides.

Trans rights protesters, who significantly outnumbered the other group, held signs reading “Keep hate out of healthcare,” and “Respect family medical decisions.” On the other side, protesters carried signs with messages like “Sex change is fantasy,” and “Stop transing gay kids.”

Ari, a trans person who grew up in Nashville and now lives in D.C., spoke to the Washington Blade about the negative effects of the Tennessee law on the well-being of trans youth. 

“I grew up with kids who died because of a lack of trans healthcare, and I am scared of that getting worse,” they said. “All that this bill brings is more dead kids.”

The Tennessee law that is being challenged in U.S. v Skrmetti took effect in 2023 and bans medical providers from prescribing medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapies to trans youth. 

A number of Democratic lawmakers, including U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), co-chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, and U.S. Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) addressed the crowd in support of trans rights. 

In his speech, Merkley said Americans deserved freedom in accessing gender affirming care and criticized the law as political intervention in private medical decisions. 

“Americans should have the freedom to make medical decisions in the privacy of their doctor’s office without politicians trying to dictate to them,” he said. 

Robert Garofalo, a chief doctor in the division of Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine at a Chicago children’s hospital, emphasized the importance of trans youth having access to gender affirming care. 

“We [providers] are seeing patients and families every day, present with crippling fears, added stress and anxiety as they desperately try to locate care where it remains legal to do so,” Garofalo, who is also a professor of pediatrics at Northwestern University, told the crowd. “Transgender children and adolescents deserve health care that is grounded in compassion, science and principles of public health and human rights. They must not be denied life saving medical care — their lives depend on it.”

Major U.S. medical associations, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, support gender affirming care. 

Research has found gender affirming care improves the mental health and overall well-being of gender diverse children and adolescents. Those who are denied access to gender affirming care are at increased risk for significant mental health challenges.  

An unlikely coalition came out to support Tennessee’s ban on gender affirming care. Far-right figures, such as U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Matt Walsh — both of whom have a history of making homophobic statements — were joined by groups such as the LGBT Courage Coalition and Gays Against Groomers. 

The groups questioned the quality of the research finding gender-affirming care to have a positive effect on the well-being of trans and gender nonconforming youth and argued that minors cannot consent to medical treatment. Ben Appel, a co-founder of the LGBT Courage Coalition, which he notes was “co-founded by gay, lesbian, bisexual, and trans adults who oppose pediatric gender medicine, which we know to be non-evidence-based and harmful to young gay people,” said gender nonconformity is often part of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual experience and should not be “medicalized.” 

“I care about the adult gay detransitioners who have been harmed … by these homophobic practice,” he said “They should have just been told they’re gay.” 

Claire, a Maryland resident who attended the rally in favor of the Tennessee law and claims to have detransitioned, described being prescribed testosterone and having a mastectomy at 14, medical treatments she says she was unable to consent to at that age. She doesn’t oppose gender affirming care for adults but is opposed to “medical experimentation on children.”

“I think that adults should be allowed to do whatever they want with their bodies. I think that it is if someone is happy with the decision that they made that’s great,” she said. “I was not able to make that decision. I was a child.” 

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

But trans activists fear that a ruling in favor of Tennessee could pave the way for states to restrict access to gender-affirming care for adults.

“There’s also broader implications for civil rights and trans rights, more broadly, for adults in the future. There are some states that have tried to ban some healthcare for adults — they haven’t yet — but I think that’s something we might also see if the Supreme Court rules that way,” Ethan Rice, a senior attorney at Lambda Legal, one of the legal organizations representing the plaintiffs in U.S. v Skrmetti, said.

In the case, three Tennessee families and a physician are challenging the Tennessee law on the grounds that it violates the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment by drawing lines based on sex and discriminating against trans people. The statute bans medications for trans children while allowing the same medications to be used when treating minors suffering from other conditions, such as early-onset puberty. 

A 2020 Supreme Court decision determined sex-based discrimination includes discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation. The key question in U.S. v. Skrmetti is whether this interpretation applies under the Equal Protection Clause.

“We really hope that the Supreme Court recognizes their own precedent on sex discrimination cases and comes out the right way, saying this is sex discrimination by the state of Tennessee and thus is unconstitutional,” Rice said. 

Twenty-six states currently have laws or policies restricting minors’ access to gender-affirming care. If the court rules against Tennessee, similar bans in other states would also be unconstitutional, granting trans youth greater access to gender affirming care nationwide. 

Edith Guffey, the board chair at PFLAG, expressed doubt the court will strike down the law, citing its sharp ideological turn to the right in recent years. But she said she remains hopeful. 

“I hope that the court will … step outside agendas and look at the needs of people and who has the right to say what’s good for their children,” she said.

Chase Strangio, an ACLU attorney representing the families, on Wednesday became the first openly trans lawyer to argue before the Supreme Court. He addressed the trans rights protesters after the hearing. 

“Whatever happens, we are the defiance,” Strangio said. “We are collectively a refutation of everything they say about us. And our fight for justice did not begin today, it will not end in June — whatever the court decides.”

Continue Reading

National

LGBTQ+ asylum seekers, migrants brace for second Trump administration

Incoming president has promised ‘mass deportations’

Published

on

A portion of the fence that marks the Mexico-U.S. border in Tijuana, Mexico, on Feb. 25, 2020. LGBTQ+ asylum seekers and migrants, and the groups that advocate on their behalf, are bracing for the second Trump administration. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

Advocacy groups in the wake of President-elect Donald Trump’s election fear his administration’s proposed immigration policies will place LGBTQ+ migrants and asylum seekers at increased risk.

“What we are expecting again is that the new administration will continue weaponizing the immigration system to keep igniting resentment,” Abdiel Echevarría-Cabán, an immigration lawyer who is based in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley, told the Washington Blade.

Trump during the campaign pledged a “mass deportation” of undocumented immigrants.

The president-elect in 2019 implemented the Migrant Protection Protocols program — known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy — that forced asylum seekers to pursue their cases in Mexico.

Advocates sharply criticized MPP, in part, because it made LGBTQ+ asylum seekers who were forced to live in Tijuana, Ciudad Juárez, Matamoros, and other Mexican border cities even more vulnerable to violence and persecution based on their gender identity and sexual orientation.

The State Department currently advises American citizens not to travel to Tamaulipas state in which Matamoros is located because of “crime and kidnapping.” The State Department also urges American citizens to “reconsider travel” to Baja California and Chihuahua states in which Tijuana and Ciudad Juárez are located respectively because of “crime and kidnapping.”

The Biden-Harris administration ended MPP in 2021.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in March 2020 implemented Title 42, which closed the Southern border to most asylum seekers and migrants because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The policy ended in May 2023.

Robert Contreras, president of Bienestar Human Services, a Los Angeles-based organization that works with Latino and LGBTQ+ communities, in a statement to the Blade noted Project 2025, which “outlines the incoming administration’s agenda, proposes extensive rollbacks of rights and protections for LGBTQ+ individuals.”

“This includes dismantling anti-discrimination protections, restricting access to gender-affirming healthcare, and increasing immigration enforcement,” said Contreras.

Trans woman in Tijuana nervously awaits response to asylum application

A Biden-Harris administration policy that took place in May 2023 says “noncitizens who cross the Southwest land border or adjacent coastal borders without authorization after traveling through another country, and without having (1) availed themselves of an existing lawful process, (2) presented at a port of entry at a pre-scheduled time using the CBP (U.S. Customs and Border Protection) One app, or (3) been denied asylum in a third country through which they traveled, are presumed ineligible for asylum unless they meet certain limited exceptions.” The exceptions under the regulation include:

  • They were provided authorization to travel to the United States pursuant to a DHS-approved parole process; 
  • They used the CBP One app to schedule a time and place to present at a port of entry, or they presented at a port of entry without using the CBP One app and established that it was not possible to access or use the CBP One app due to a language barrier, illiteracy, significant technical failure, or other ongoing and serious obstacle; or 
  • They applied for and were denied asylum in a third country en route to the United States.  

Biden in June issued an executive order that prohibits migrants from asking for asylum in the U.S. if they “unlawfully” cross the Southern border.

The Organization for Refuge, Asylum and Migration works with LGBTQ+ migrants and asylum seekers in Tijuana, Mexicali and other Mexican border cities.

ORAM Executive Director Steve Roth is among those who criticized Biden’s executive order. Roth told the Blade the incoming administration’s proposed policies would “leave vulnerable transgender people, gay men, lesbians, and others fleeing life-threatening violence and persecution with little to no opportunity to seek asylum in the U.S. stripped of safe pathways.”

“Many will find themselves stranded in dangerous regions like the Mexico-U.S. border and transit countries around the world where their safety and well-being will be further jeopardized by violence, exploitation, and a lack of support,” he said. 

Jennicet Gutiérrez, co-executive director of Familia: TQLM, an organization that advocates on behalf of transgender and gender non-conforming immigrants, noted to the Blade a trans woman who has asked for asylum in the U.S. “has been patiently waiting in Tijuana” for more than six months “for her CBP One application response.”

“Now she feels uncertain if she will ever get the chance to cross to the United States,” said Gutiérrez.

She added Trump’s election “is going to be devastating for LGBTQ+ asylum seekers.”

“Transgender migrants are concerned about the future of their cases,” said Gutiérrez. “The upcoming administration is not going to prioritize or protect our communities. Instead, they will prioritize mass deportations and incarceration.”

Jennicet Gutiérrez (Photo courtesy of Familia: TQLM)

TransLatin@ Coalition President Bamby Salcedo echoed Gutiérrez.

“Trans people who are immigrants are getting the double whammy with the new administration,” Salcedo told the Blade. “As it is, trans people have been political targets throughout this election. Now, with the specific target against immigrants, trans immigrants will be greatly impacted.”

‘We’re ready to keep fighting’

Trans Queer Pueblo is a Phoenix-based organization that provides health care and other services to undocumented LGBTQ+ immigrants and migrants of color. The group, among other things, also advocates on behalf of those who are in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers.

“We refuse to wait for politicians to change systems that were designed to hurt us,” Trans Queer Pueblo told the Blade in a statement. “The elections saw both political parties using our trans and migrant identities as political pawns.”

Trans Queer Pueblo acknowledged concerns over the incoming administration’s immigration policies. It added, however, Arizona’s Proposition 314 is “our biggest battle.”

Arizona voters last month approved Proposition 314, which is also known as the Secure the Border Act.

Trans Queer Pueblo notes it “makes it a crime for undocumented people to exist anywhere, with arrests possible anywhere, including schools and hospitals.” The group pointed out Proposition 314 also applies to asylum seekers.

“We are building a future where LGBTQ+ migrants of color can live free, healthy, and secure, deciding our own destiny without fear,” Trans Queer Pueblo told the Blade. “This new administration will not change our mission — we’re ready to keep fighting.”

Contreras stressed Bienestar “remains committed to advocate for the rights and safety of all migrants and asylum seekers.” Gutiérrez added it is “crucial for LGBTQ+ migrants to know that they are not alone.”

“We will continue to organize and mobilize,” she said. “We must resist unjust treatments and laws.”

Continue Reading

National

Biden, other administration officials mark Transgender Day of Remembrance

‘Epidemic of violence towards transgender people’

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

Democratic officials marked Transgender Day of Remembrance, which took place on Wednesday, honoring the lives lost to anti-trans violence and calling out rising anti-trans rhetoric and discrimination.

President Joe Biden in a statement said “we mourn the transgender Americans whose lives were taken this year in horrific acts of violence.”

“There should be no place for hate in America — and yet too many transgender Americans, including young people, are cruelly targeted and face harassment simply for being themselves. It’s wrong,” he said. “Every American deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, and to live free from discrimination. Today, we recommit ourselves to building a country where everyone is afforded that promise.”

U.S. Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), and Mark Pocan (D-Wisc.), as well as U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), all members of the Congressional Equality Caucus, introduced a bicameral resolution commemorating the Transgender Day of Remembrance and “recognizing the epidemic of violence toward transgender people and memorializing the lives lost this year.” 

“As anti-transgender rhetoric and legislation has increased in the United States over recent years, unfortunately so has anti-transgender violence,” Jayapal said in a statement announcing the resolution. “On Transgender Day of Remembrance, this resolution stands as a symbol of the strength and resilience of the trans community and honors the lives of the trans people we have lost to horrific violence.”

Jacobs also addressed President-elect Donald Trump’s anti-trans rhetoric. 

“Donald Trump’s anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-trans agenda will likely fuel this anxiety and violence against queer communities,” Jacobs said. “That makes this year’s Transgender Day of Remembrance even more important. Our bicameral resolution is a powerful reminder that anti-trans rhetoric can cost lives.”

A report by the Human Rights Campaign documenting anti-trans violence found at least 36 trans and gender-expansive people in the U.S. lost their lives to violence since last year.

Transgender Day of Remembrance was founded in 1999 by trans activist Gwendolyn Ann Smith to commemorate the one year anniversary of the murder of Rita Hester, a trans woman who was killed in Boston. The day has since grown into a national and international event.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken in a statement honored Transgender Day of Remembrance. 

“Transgender individuals exist in every country, every culture, and every faith tradition,” he said. “ The United States recognizes Transgender Day of Remembrance to affirm the dignity and human rights of transgender persons globally.” 

In a post on X, U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) wrote, “On this Transgender Day of Remembrance, we honor the trans and nonbinary lives lost to violence simply for being who they are. Every American deserves to live their truth and feel safe doing so. Hate has no place here.”

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield noted the Biden-Harris administration’s advocacy for the trans community, which has included issuing a policy that prohibits discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation under the Title IX federal civil rights law this year. 

“On Transgender Day of Remembrance, we reaffirm there is no place for hate in America. The Biden-Harris Administration is proud to advocate for the safety of transgender and all LGBTQI+ Americans, including at the UN,” she said in a post on X. 

Victor Madrigal-Borloz, a former independent UN expert on LGBTQ+ and intersex rights, also on X, said trans people’s human rights are questioned “for reasons that have nothing to do with them and a lot with bigotry.”

“Support them actively,” he urged.

Xavier Becerra, the secretary of health and human services, seemingly mixed up the day that was being observed, releasing a statement mistakenly commemorating Transgender Day of Visibility, which takes place on March 31. 

“We fight so that trans Americans can go to the doctor and receive the same treatment as any other patient … so that they feel welcomed at school and in their community for who they are,” Becerra said. 

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, issued a proclamation recognizing Transgender Day of Remembrance, continuing the precedent he set last year as the first Maryland governor to issue such a proclamation. 

Moore in May signed into law a bill that added gender-affirming care to Maryland’s definition of legally protected health care, affirming its status as a sanctuary state for trans people and their healthcare providers. 

Continue Reading

National

Reports of hate-filled messages under investigation

Racist, homophobic, messages reported across the U.S. following presidential election

Published

on

Canva graphic by Gisselle Palomera

On Friday, the Federal Bureau of Investigation stated they are now investigating a series of racist and offensive messages sent to LGBTQ+ communities and communities of color around the country. At first, text messages were targeted at Black Americans and African Americans, then the wave of hateful digital rhetoric spread to target the LGBTQ+ and Latin American communities. 

Earlier this month, the initial text messages were sent out to Black American and African American people regarding a fake work assignment that suggested they were going to be working as slaves in a plantation. College students, high school students, professionals and even children, reported receiving the mass texts from unrecognized phone numbers following the presidential election. 

Since then, at least 30 states throughout the nation have reported cases of similar messages containing hate-filled speech, according to CNN. 

According to the report issued by the FBI, the texts and emails that target the LGBTQ+ and Latin American communities stated that the receivers of these messages were selected for deportation or to report to re-education camps. 

The Federal Communications Commission’s enforcement bureau is investigating the text messages. Chair Jessica Rosenworcel issued a statement regarding the texts. 

“These messages are unacceptable,” said Rosenworcel. “That’s why our Enforcement Bureau is already investigating and looking into them alongside federal and state law enforcement. We take this type of targeting very seriously.”

The FBI reports that though they have not received reports of violence related to the messages, they are working with the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, to evaluate all reported incidents across the U.S. 

Last year, the Leadership Conference Education Fund launched a report stating that hate crimes increase during elections, pointing to white supremacists being particularly active during the past four presidential election cycles.

A portion of the report reads: “The Trump candidacy empowered white nationalists and provided them with a platform — one they had been seeking with renewed intensity since the historic election of America’s first Black president in 2008. Since 2015, communities across the country have experienced some of the most violent and deadliest years for hate in modern history.”

If you have received a similar text or email, you can report it here.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

House races could decide Department of Education’s future

Second Trump administration could target transgender students

Published

on

The Lyndon Baines Johnson Building, Washington D.C., headquarters of the U.S. Department of Education (Photo Credit: GSA/U.S. Dept. of Education)

The Associated Press reports that more than a dozen races for seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, including 10 for congressional districts in California, remain too close to call as of Tuesday — a full week after voters cast their ballots on Nov. 5.

Democrats hope that if they can flip the lower chamber, which is now governed by a narrow Republican majority, it might function as a bulwark against President-elect Donald Trump, his incoming administration, and the 53-47 majority in the U.S. Senate that his party secured last week.

If, on the other hand, the GOP retains control of the House, the Republican victory would clear a major roadblock that could otherwise have stymied a major plank of Trump’s education agenda: Plans to permanently shutter the U.S. Department of Education.

Congress ultimately scuttled the former president’s effort to do so during his first administration — though, technically, the proposal then was to merge the agency with the U.S. Department of Labor.

The Wall Street Journal notes that some Republicans, at the time and in the years since, have come out against plans to abolish the 44-year-old agency, in some cases even objecting to major funding cuts proposed by Trump that they understood were likely be unpopular.

However, if the second term plans for DOE as delineated in the Trump campaign’s Agenda47 and the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 governing blueprint become a major policy priority once the incoming administration takes over in January, reluctant Republican lawmakers will face tremendous pressure to get out of Trump’s way.

Federal government will remain in schools to advance anti-trans, anti-woke agenda

Among other responsibilities, DOE disburses and manages student loans, enforces the civil rights laws in public schools, and provides funding for students with disabilities. The agency’s programs, such as Title I, offer assistance for low-achieving or high-poverty K-12 schools, while Pell Grants help undergraduates who otherwise would not be able to pay for college.

It is unclear whether or how those functions will continue if the DOE is disbanded.

Trump’s aim, at least in large part, is to give states — rather than the federal government — the ultimate say over how their schools are run. At the same time, perhaps paradoxically, the other cornerstone of his education policy agenda is to issue proscriptive rules governing the content, curricula, and classroom discussion that will be permitted in the country’s public schools.

Specifically, this means “critical race theory, gender ideology or other inappropriate racial, sexual or political” topics or materials are forbidden. Reasonable people are likely to disagree about what is and is not “inappropriate,” and they may well have different, even disparate, definitions for terms like “gender ideology.”

When Florida and other states enacted similar anti-LGBTQ content and curricular restrictions in their public schools, critics warned the ambiguous language in the statute and the resulting confusion would lead to censorship, or perhaps self-censorship, especially for students and staff who, by virtue of their skin color or sexual orientation or gender identity, are more likely to be targeted with targeted or overzealous enforcement in the first place.

DOE plays major role investigating alleged civil rights violations in schools

According to the National Education Association, “federal civil rights laws prohibit school boards and other employers from discriminating against or harassing staff or students based on their sexual orientation or gender identity,” which “means, for example, that a school district may not prohibit only LGBTQ+ educators from answering students’ questions about their families, may not prohibit recognition and discussion in class only of LGBTQ+ families, and may not require that only LGBTQ+ students hide their sexual orientation or gender identity at school.”

However, the NEA warns, “some school districts, administrators, and the Florida Department of Education may nonetheless choose to do so until a court orders otherwise.”

If officials at a public high school allow heterosexual teachers to display family photos in their classrooms but warn the openly gay teacher that he must put his away or be terminated for violating restrictions on in-school discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity, the manner in which the policy was enforced against him would presumably run afoul of the federal civil rights laws, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The teacher could assume the expense of hiring an attorney to pursue legal remedies, shouldering the burden and the risk that litigation that could drag on for months and conclude with a judgment in favor of his employer. Alternatively, until or unless Trump dissolves the agency, he could file a complaint with DOE’s Office of Civil Rights.

Alternatively, until or unless Trump dissolves the agency, the teacher could file a complaint with DOE. The agency’s Office of Civil Rights would evaluate the information he shared to determine whether there were sufficient grounds to open an investigation and, if so, would deploy “a variety of fact-finding techniques” that can include a review of documentary evidence submitted by both parties, interviews with key witnesses, and site visits.

After the investigation is complete, if a “preponderance of the evidence supports a conclusion that the recipient failed to comply with the law,” OCR will attempt to negotiate a resolution agreement. If the recipient refuses to resolve the matter in this manner, OCR can “suspend, terminate, or refuse to grant or continue federal financial assistance to the recipient, or may refer the case to the Department of Justice.”

According to the DOE’s website, the agency has 11,782 investigations that were open as of Tuesday, with complaints against institutions of all kinds operating in all 50 states, from rural elementary schools in the Deep South to prestigious medical schools, community colleges, and charter schools for students with developmental disabilities. Likewise, the six civil rights laws over which OCR has jurisdiction cover a wide range of conduct, from sexual harassment to discrimination, retaliation, and single-sex athletics scholarships.

Should Trump succeed in abolishing the department, it is not yet clear how those active investigations will be handled, nor how complaints about violations of civil rights law by educational institutions would be reported and investigated moving forward in the agency’s absence.

During his first administration, Trump passed proposed changes to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which retooled the process for reporting sexual assault on college campuses in ways that were widely seen as imbalanced in favor of the accused.

President Joe Biden in April issued new guidelines that featured “significant shifts in how institutions address sexual harassment, and assault allegations while expanding protections for LGBTQ+ and pregnant students,” the American Council on Education wrote. Specifically, the administration provided a “new definition of sexual harassment, extending jurisdiction to off-campus, and international incidents,” while “clarifying protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, and parenting status.”

The regulations sidestepped thornier questions, however, about how schools should approach issues at the intersection of gender identity and competitive sports, specifying only that they should avoid bans that would categorically prohibit transgender athletes from participating.

Shortly after the Biden administration’s guidelines were introduced, Trump vowed they would be “terminated” on his first day in office. He also pledged to enact anti-trans policies that appear to have been modeled after some of the most extreme of the roughly 1,600 anti-trans bills that conservative statehouses have proposed from 2021-2024.

Among other promises Trump made during the campaign were plans to enact a nationwide ban on trans student athletes competing in accordance with their gender identity, a federal law that would recognize only two genders, and the prosecution of health care providers who administer gender affirming care to patients younger than 18.

Continue Reading

National

Trump refers to Anderson Cooper as ‘Allison’

Crude insults continue in effort to attract male voters

Published

on

Donald Trump is referring to CNN’s Anderson Cooper as ‘Allison.’

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump referred repeatedly over the weekend to CNN’s Anderson Cooper as “Allison Cooper.”

Cooper, one of the nation’s most prominent openly gay television anchors, moderated a town hall last week with Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris.

Trump last Friday called Anderson “Allison” in a social media post, then used the moniker again at a Michigan rally.

“If you watched her being interviewed by Allison Cooper the other night, he’s a nice person. You know Allison Cooper? CNN fake news,” Trump said, before adding, “Oh, she said no, his name is Anderson. Oh, no.”

Trump repeated the name during another Michigan rally on Saturday, according to the Associated Pres, then followed it up during a reference in Pennsylvania. “They had a town hall,” Trump said in Michigan. “Even Allison Cooper was embarrassed by it. He was embarrassed by it.”

Describing Anderson Cooper as female plays into offensive and stereotypical depictions of gay men as effeminate as Trump continues to pursue the so-called “bro vote,” amping up crude and vulgar displays in an effort to appeal to male voters.

Continue Reading

National

HRC rallies LGBTQ voters in 12 states ahead of Election Day

10 Days of Action campaign targets pro-equality candidate

Published

on

Human Rights Campaign headquarters in D.C. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Human Rights Campaign said it filled 1,426 new volunteer shifts and held 174 events across key swing states between Oct. 10-20 as part of its 10 Days of Action campaign. 

The LGBTQ civil rights advocacy group is working to mobilize and turn out voters in support of pro-equality and LGBTQ candidates, including the Harris-Walz ticket, on Election Day.

HRC reported exceeding its recruitment goals, noting the strong response across the 12 states as a “clear and resounding message” that LGBTQ and allied voters are energized to back the Harris-Walz ticket. 

To kick off the 10 Days of Action, Gwen Walz, the spouse of Minnesota governor and Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz, spoke at a Philadelphia event that HRC and the Out for Harris-Walz coalition hosted on Oct. 10.

Walz highlighted her husband’s long-standing support for LGBTQ issues, such as his role in fighting to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in Congress and banning so-called conversion therapy as governor, according to the Pennsylvania Capital-Star

Other events launched canvassing efforts for Senate candidates, such as U.S. Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Bob Casey (D-Pa.), along with House candidates, such as Will Rollins and Mondaire Jones in California and New York respectively. 

A virtual organizing call on Oct. 11 that the Out for Harris-Walz coalition hosted featured prominent figures, including actor Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Andy Cohen, U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), and Delaware state Sen. Sarah McBride, who is running for Congress.

To close out the 10 Days of Action, HRC President Kelley Robinson canvassed with LGBTQ organizers in Phoenix on Oct. 20. 

In a statement, Robinson said the campaign’s work is “far from over.”

“We plan to spend every day until the election making sure everyone we know is registered to vote and has a plan to vote because no one is going to give us the future we deserve — we have to fight for it and show America that when we show up, equality wins,” she said. “Together, we will elect pro-equality leaders like Vice President Harris and Governor Walz who value our communities and are ready to lead us forward with more freedom and opportunity.”

A September HRC poll found that LGBTQ voters favor Kamala Harris over Donald Trump in the presidential race by a nearly 67-point margin.

Continue Reading

National

73 percent of LGBTQ community centers face harassment: Report

Findings show threats triggered by ‘anti-LGBTQ politics or rhetoric’

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Daniel Truitt)

The biennial 2024 LGBTQ Community Center Survey Report, which was released Oct. 16, shows that 73 percent of 199 U.S.-based LGBTQ community centers that participated in the survey reported they had experienced anti-LGBTQ threats or harassment during the past two years.

The survey, which included LGBTQ centers in 42 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, is prepared by the Fort Lauderdale-based CenterLink, which provides services and support for LGBTQ community centers; and the Boulder, Colo.-based Movement Advancement Project (MAP), a research organization that focuses on social justice issues impacting the LGBTQ community.

“The biennial survey series started in 2008 and highlights the crucial role these centers play in the broader LGBTQ movement, offering an invaluable link between LGBTQ people and local, state, and national efforts to advance LGBTQ equality,” a statement released by the two organizations says.

The statement and the findings in the report point out that most of the LGBTQ centers that faced anti-LGBTQ threats or harassment said they were triggered by “anti-LGBTQ politics and rhetoric” that has surfaced across the country in the past several years.

“As attacks on LGBTQ people escalate year after year, we applaud these centers’ ongoing dedication to serving on the front lines – meeting both the immediate and long-term needs of LGBTQ people, their families, and their communities across the country,” Tessa Juste, a Movement Advancement Project official, said in the statement.

“This report illustrates the vital difference these centers make in people’s everyday lives, while also highlighting the urgent need for continued funding and support of these centers and the lifelines they provide,” Juste said.

“A majority of centers said they had experienced these threats or harassment offline (63 percent of centers) as well as online (68 percent),” the report states. “Almost half of centers (47 percent) said they had experienced both online and offline harassment in the past two years,” the report says.

“Numerous centers mentioned in open-ended comments that these threats or harassment were specifically in response to anti-LGBTQ politics or rhetoric (77 percent), transgender-related events or programs (50 percent), and youth-related programming (42 percent), again reflecting the current political environment and its targeted attacks on LGBTQ and specifically transgender youth,” according to the report.

Although the report lists in its appendix the names of each of the 199 LGBTQ community centers that participated in the survey, it does not disclose the names and locations of the LGBTQ centers that reported receiving threats or harassment.

Dana Juniel, director of communications for the Movement Advancement Project, told the Washington Blade in a statement that the two organizations that conducted the survey have a policy of not disclosing the centers’ responses to specific questions in the survey.

“Not identifying the specific centers has been our policy since the inception of this report and it is a typical policy for this type of report,” Juniel said. “It’s important to understand that the goal of the survey is to better understand the landscape and capacity of the movement as a whole, not to identify gaps or challenges for specific organizations,” she said.

The report shows that among the LGBTQ community centers that participated in the 2023-2024 survey were the D.C. Center for the LGBTQ Community; the D.C. LGBTQ youth advocacy group SMYAL, which the report lists as an LGBTQ center; the Delmarva Pride Center in Easton, Md.; the Frederick Center in Frederick, Md.; the CAMP Rehoboth LGBTQ center in Rehoboth Beach, Del.; the Sussex Pride center also  in Delaware; and LGBTQ centers in Virginia based in the cities of Richmond, Norfolk, Winchester, Oakton, and Staunton.

Spokespersons for the D.C. Center and CAMP Rehoboth did not immediately respond to a Blade inquiry on whether they were among the centers that experienced threats or harassment. Sussex Pride Executive Director David Mariner told the Blade that his center was among those that had not received anti-LGBTQ threats or harassment in the past two years.

The Blade reported in August of this year that D.C. police were investigating threats made against SMYAL following the publication of an article criticizing SMYAL’s programs supporting LGBTQ youth in the conservative online publication Townhall.com. A D.C. police report said the threats were reported by SMYAL Executive Director Erin Whelan.

The statement released by CenterLink and Movement Advancement Project also points out that the LGBTQ center survey shows LGBTQ community centers in the U.S. serve more than 58,700 people each week, or three million people each year, “with many centers primarily serving people and communities that are historically under-resourced and under-served, including low-income, people of color, transgender people, and those under the age of 18.”

Denise Spivak, CEO of CenterLink, says in the joint statement that the report “is a crucial guidepost for us to see the positive impact of LGBTQ centers across the U.S. as well as what areas need additional resources.” She added, “As we celebrate our 30th anniversary, this report makes clear the importance of LGBTQ centers in our communities.”

Among other things, the report includes these findings:

• 66 percent of LGBTQ community centers directly provide physical health, mental health, and/or anti-violence services or programs

• Half of the centers (50 percent) offer computer resources or services to the public, providing needed tools for job searching, career development, social services, and schoolwork.

• Nearly all centers (92 percent) engage in advocacy, public policy, or civic engagement activities across a wide range of issues and areas.

• While nearly half of all centers remain thinly staffed, 84 percent of responding centers employ paid staff, providing jobs to 3,100 people.

• In 2023, roughly 11,600 people volunteered more than 421,000 hours at responding community centers, helping centers with and without paid staff to significantly expand their reach and impact.

The 2024 LGBTQ Community Center Survey Report can be accessed here.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

Pentagon gives honorable discharges to 800+ LGBTQ+ veterans

Administration has committed to remedying harms of anti-LGBTQ military policies

Published

on

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin (screen capture/YouTube/CNN)

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Tuesday announced the Pentagon has upgraded the paperwork of more than 800 veterans who were discharged other than honorably before discriminatory policies like “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” were repealed.

“More than 96 percent of the individuals who were administratively separated under DADT and who served for long enough to receive a merit-based characterization of service now have an honorable characterization of service,” said Christa Specht, director of legal policy at the department’s Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.

The change will allow veterans to access benefits they had been denied, in areas from health care and college tuition assistance to VA loan programs and some jobs.

Separately, this summer President Joe Biden issued pardons to service members who had been convicted for sodomy before military laws criminalizing same-sex intimacy were lifted.

More than a decade after the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the administration has made a priority of helping LGBTQ+ veterans who are eligible to upgrade their discharge papers, directing the department to help them overcome bureaucratic barriers and difficult-to-navigate processes.

However, as noted by CBS News, which documented the challenges faced by these former service members in a comprehensive investigation published last year, these efforts are ongoing.

The department is continuing to review cases beyond the 800+ included in Tuesday’s announcement, with an official telling CBS, “We encourage all veterans who believe they have suffered an error or injustice to request a correction to their military records.” 

Continue Reading

National

Detroit teen arrested in fatal stabbing of gay man

Prosecutor says defendant targeted victim from online dating app

Published

on

Officials say Ahmed Al-Alikhan allegedly fatally stabbed Howard Brisendine.

A 17-year-old Detroit man has been charged with first-degree murder for the Sept. 24 stabbing death of a 64-year-old gay man that prosecutors say he met through an online dating app.

A statement released by the Wayne County, Mich., Prosecutor’s Office says Ahmed Al-Alikhan allegedly fatally stabbed Howard Brisendine inside Brisendine’s home in Detroit before he allegedly took the victim’s car keys and stole the car.

The statement says police arrived on the scene about 4:04 p.m. on Sept. 29 after receiving a call about a deceased person found in their home. Upon arrival police found Brisentine deceased in his living room suffering from multiple stab wounds, the statement says.

“It is alleged that the defendant targeted the victim on an online dating app because he was a member of the LGBTQ community,” according to the prosecutor’s statement.

“It is further alleged that on Sept. 24, 2024, at the victim’s residence in the 6000 block of Minock Street in Detroit, the defendant stabbed the victim multiple times, fatally injuring him, before taking the victim’s car keys and fleeing the scene in his vehicle,” it says.

It further states that Al-Alikhan was first taken into custody by police in Dearborn, Mich., and later turned over to the Detroit police on Oct. 1. The statement doesn’t say how police learned that Al-Alikhan was the suspected perpetrator. 

In addition to first-degree murder, Al-Alikhan has been charged with felony murder and unlawful driving away in an automobile.

“It is hard to fathom a more planned series of events in this case,” prosecutor Kym Worthy said in the statement. “Unfortunately, the set of alleged facts are far too common in the LGBTQ community,” Worthy said. “We will bring justice to Mr. Brisendine. The defendant is 17 years and 11 months old – mere weeks away from being an adult offender under the law.”

She added, “As a result of that and the heinous nature of this crime, we will seek to try him as an adult.”

A spokesperson for the prosecutor’s office said the office has not designated the incident as a hate crime, but said regardless of that designation, a conviction of first-degree murder could result in a sentence of life in prison. The spokesperson, Maria Lewis, said the prosecutor’s office was not initially disclosing the name of the dating app through which the two men met, but said that would be disclosed in court as the case proceeds.

The NBC affiliate station in Detroit, WDIV TV, reported that Brisendine was found deceased by Luis Mandujano, who lives near where Brisendine lived and who owns the Detroit gay bar Gigi’s, where Brisendine worked as a doorman. The NBC station report says Mandujano said he went to Brisendine’s house on Sept. 29 after Brisendine did not show up for work and his car was not at his house.

Mandujano, who is organizing a GoFundMe fundraising effort for Brisendine, states in his message on the GoFundMe site that Brisendine worked as a beloved doorman at Gigi’s bar.

“We will do what we can to honor Howard’s life as we put him to rest,” Mandujano states in his GoFundMe message. “He left the material world in a volatile manner at the hand of a monster that took his life for being gay. Let’s not allow hate to win!”

In response to a Facebook message from the Washington Blade, a spokesperson for Gigi’s said the money raised from the GoFundMe effort will be used for Brisendine’s funeral expenses and his “remaining bills.” The spokesperson, who didn’t disclose their name, added, “Any leftover money will be donated to local LGBTQ nonprofit groups to combat hate.”

The GoFundMe site can be accessed here.

Continue Reading

Popular