Connect with us

News

Trump’s call to end HIV epidemic falls on skeptical ears

President touts ‘important strides’ in fighting disease

Published

on

2019 State of the Union (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Trump took the opportunity of his second State of the Union address to call for an end to HIV transmission in the next 10 years — but that call was received with skepticism from advocates unhappy with his administration’s approach to the epidemic thus far.

Speaking Tuesday before a joint session of Congress, Trump talked about the United States having made “important strides” in combatting HIV/AIDS, but that the time has come to finish the job.

“In recent years we have made remarkable progress in the fight against HIV and AIDS,” Trump said. “Scientific breakthroughs have brought a once-distant dream within reach. My budget will ask Democrats and Republicans to make the needed commitment to eliminate the HIV epidemic in the United States within 10 years. We have made incredible strides. Incredible. Together, we will defeat AIDS in America and beyond.”

The part of Trump’s remarks about “important strides” in combatting HIV/AIDS and defeating the disease not just in the United States but “beyond” were ad-libs from his prepared remarks.

Trump’s line about defeating HIV/AIDS was among those applauded by members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, including possible 2020 hopefuls Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).

The inclusion of the call to end HIV in the State of the Union address was expected. On Monday, Politico reported health officials within the Trump administration were expecting that call to be a component of the speech. The Department of Health & Human Services is also expected to unveil a more detailed plan later this week.

Carl Schmid, deputy executive director of the AIDS Institute, said in a statement Trump is taking a “bold step” in the fight to end HIV/AIDS.

A co-chair of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS, Schmid said the remarks were part of a bold initiative to end the HIV epidemic by 2030.

“His proposal to increase access to antiretroviral medications for people living with HIV and for prevention in those communities with the highest rates of HIV and where additional resources are most needed will translate into fewer HIV infections,” Schmid said. “Under the president’s proposal, the number of new infections can eventually be reduced to zero.”

Trump’s call to end HIV transmission is consistent with the administration adopting Obama-era goals to combat the epidemic in a progress report issued last year on the 2010 National AIDS Strategy. The administration is set to produce an updated version of that strategy by 2020.

The announcement also follows Secretary of Health & Human Services Alex Azar’s pledge in December to fight HIV/AIDS in a speech that recognized its disproportionate impact on African-Americans, Latinos and gay men.

Among those commending Trump for including a call to end HIV and calling for additional detail was Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

“Many experts have stated over and over that we have the tools to end the epidemic. What we lack is the political will,” Weinstein said. “AHF looks forward to the details of the president’s plan and hopes it will address primary prevention of new HIV infections – including aggressive promotion of condoms and safer sex education, universal access to treatment for everyone living with HIV, strengthening the Ryan White HIV Program and protecting the 340B Drug Discount Program.”

But the general consensus among HIV/AIDS advocates was Trump — who defeated a Democratic nominee in 2016 who talked of an “AIDS-free generation” — wasn’t making enough commitments to pull off his stated goal.

Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), who’s gay and one of the co-chairs of the LGBTQ Equality Caucus, told he Washington Blade on Capitol Hill after the State of the Union address he does “applaud” the pledge to end HIV, but said the commitment may fall by the wayside like so many others.

“The president made bold promises in the campaign about reducing the costs of prescription drugs and when it came really time to follow through on it, he didn’t do it,” Takano said. “The same thing about infrastructure. Democrats, all of us, are willing to work with him on a true infrastructure bill, but he’s got to follow up on it, so the words I can agree with, whether they are bold true words remain to be seen.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was also cautious about Trump’s commitment to end HIV in a statement after the speech.

“The president’s call for ending HIV transmission in America is interesting, but if he is serious about ending the HIV/AIDS crisis, he must end his assault on health care and the dignity of the LGBTQ community,” Pelosi said.

Stacey Long Simmons, director of advocacy and action at the National LGBTQ Task Force, also questioned whether Trump was serious about ending HIV transmission despite his words in the State of the Union address.

“HIV advocates all agree that ending transmission is an important goal,” Simmons said. “Based on Trump’s repeatedly broken promises, we have cause to question his commitment until we see the necessary funding flowing to strategies that will actually end transmission.”

Trump has disappointed advocates fighting HIV/AIDS before. For starters, Trump — in an action first reported by the Washington Blade — fired all members of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS in late 2017 via a letter without explanation. Those terminations occurred after six members of the council resigned on their own in protest over the administration’s inaction on the epidemic.

Only in December 2018 did the Trump administration finally announce new members of the council, but those members were two co-chairs, Schmid and John Wiesman. No other replacements have been named.

Trump has also made repealing the Affordable Care Act a main goal of his administration, although efforts seemed to have fizzled out after failed attempts in his first year in the White House. Nonetheless, Trump succeeded in repealing the individual mandate in Obamacare under the 2017 tax reform law and allowed states to implement work requirements under the Medicaid expansions.

According to the Henry Kaiser Family Foundation, Medicaid is the largest source of insurance coverage for people with HIV. An estimated 40 percent of people with HIV receive care under the program.

Also of concern are the “religious freedom” actions instituted within the Department of Health & Human Services under Roger Severino, a former Heritage Foundation scholar and now director of the HHS Office for Civil Rights.

Those actions include the creation of a Conscience & Religious Freedom Division. Critics say the division enables the denial of medical services in the name of religious freedom to LGBT people, including gender reassignment surgery for transgender people, as well as people with HIV.

David Stacy, director of government affairs for the Human Rights Campaign, said the Trump administration’s efforts disproportionately affect people with HIV and inhibit efforts to confront the epidemic.

“If this administration wants to combat the spread of HIV, they need to immediately end their efforts to cut Medicaid funding, undermine the Affordable Care Act and license discrimination against the most at-risk communities when they seek healthcare,” Stacy said. “This administration simply cannot achieve this goal while, at the same time, charging forward with attacks on health care for the communities most impacted by HIV. The American public deserves a real commitment from their government to end the HIV epidemic.”

A budget proposal with increased funds for HIV/AIDS would be a change for Trump. His first two budget requests to Congress have also requested funding cuts for both domestic HIV programs, chiefly the Ryan White Care Act, and programs designed to fight the global epidemic, such as PEPFAR. Although the cuts to domestic programs were diminished in the second budget, the cuts to global programs were still considered draconian.

Despite Trump’s request to cut those programs, the Republican-controlled Congress continued appropriating funds for those programs at the same level.

Simmons warned those who heard Trump’s pledge in the State of the Union address not to give him a pass on his administration’s neglect on HIV/AIDS.

“If Trump was serious about HIV, he wouldn’t have proposed HIV funding cuts in his first two budgets,” Simmons said. “If Trump was serious about helping those with HIV and reducing the transmission of HIV, he wouldn’t have abruptly dismissed the presidential council on HIV and left the council vacant for nearly a year. If Trump was serious about reducing the transmission of HIV, he wouldn’t have selected a vice president that gutted funding for health clinics, leading to an HIV outbreak in rural Indiana.”

The Department of Health & Human Services is also pursuing a controversial rule change to Medicare Part D, which affords seniors prescription drug coverage. The administration says the policy is intended to lower drug costs, but many advocates fighting HIV/AIDS said it would have the opposite effect.

Asia Russell, executive director of the New York-based Health GAP, said the Trump administration thus far has been a “nightmare” for people with HIV in the United States and around the world.

“Tonight’s announcement will not wake us up from this nightmare unless it immediately reverses these harmful political decisions,” Russell said. “To end the HIV epidemics at home and globally, a real leader must call for: At least $1 billion in additional funding for global AIDS for fiscal year 2020, a permanent repeal of the Global Gag Rule, Medicare for All to ensure access to quality health care in the United States, evidence-based policies such as harm reduction for people who use drugs, and truly progressive proposals to slash the cost of medicines in the U.S. and globally.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

California

California’s perspective on the U.S. v Skrmetti case

A final ruling on the case won’t be made until June 2025

Published

on

Canva graphic by Gisselle Palomera

The U.S. v Skrmetti case has been on the Supreme Court’s radar since November 2023, when a writ of certiorari petition was filed on behalf of Jonathan Thomas Skrmetti and 2 other families. 

On December 4, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the lawsuit that states the Tennessee ban on gender-affirming healthcare for youth is unconstitutional and violates the Fourteenth Amendment. 

The question presented was whether Tennessee Senate Bill 1, which prohibits all medical treatments or courses of action intended to treat gender dysphoria or affirm gender transitions for youth, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits sex-based discrimination.

The far-reaching impacts of U.S. v Skrmetti are being felt even prior to the decision of the case. The Washington Post recently reported that following the results of the presidential election, LGBTQ+ Americans began stockpiling gender-affirming medications and making plans to move out of states that have not taken the necessary steps to provide sanctuary. This is reminiscent of reports earlier this year pointing toward a trend of women and non-male people stockpiling on abortion medication following the overturning of Roe v Wade in 2022. 

Samantha and Brian Williams’ daughter, the trans teen at the center of this case, spoke about her perspective in a published case brief by the American Civil Liberties Union. 

“I don’t even want to think about having to go back to the dark place I was in before I was able to come out and access the care that my doctors have prescribed for me,” she said. “I want this law to be struck down so that I can continue to receive the care I need, in conversation with my parents and my doctors, and have the freedom to live my life and do the things I enjoy.” 

Understanding the case 

Tennessee SB 1 is codified under section 68-33-103, states that a healthcare provider should not perform or offer to perform medical procedures with the purpose of treating discomfort or distress relating to gender dysphoria, except when it is explicitly necessary to treat defects, physical injury or diseases. 

Under this code, it is also explicitly stated that “gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, gender incongruence, or any mental condition, disorder, disability or abnormality,” count as a “disease.” That section of the code summarized above, specifically states that the only exceptions to the ban on trans healthcare are to treat defects, injuries or diseases. Meaning that the language here intentionally points toward closing a loophole that would allow patients to get treatment if being transgender was considered a disease. 

If the Supreme Court sides with Tennessee, this could set the path for states to deny gender-affirming care to youth on the state level, affecting progress in many states like Colorado, Michigan, Maine and Rhode Island. 

In August, the Human Rights Campaign listed Tennessee along with a dozen other states, stating they are all in current litigation proceedings challenging similar bans targeting trans youth. HRC published a map to track the legislation in a total of 26 states that have current bans on gender-affirming care in the U.S.

This case also marks the first time the Supreme Court has directly considered how the Equal Protection Clause in the fourteenth amendment applies to trans, gender nonconforming and intersex youth. 

What’s to be determined

The Supreme Court will directly consider how the Equal Protection Clause would apply to gender-affirming care for youth. 

The standard of that review is to be determined, which is how the case will be addressed, based on a level of scrutiny. There are 3 levels of scrutiny that determine how a law will be evaluated: strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny and rational basis review.  

With strict scrutiny at the highest level, the first transgender lawyer to argue before the Supreme Court, Chase Strangio, argued that this case should be treated with skepticism, or the highest level of scrutiny, due to the law discriminating based on sex. Meaning, this law should be heavily questioned as to whether or not it violates the Constitution. 

The Tennessee Att. General argued that the law does not make a sex classification and also argued that states have the power to regulate this issue without bringing in the skepticism of the Supreme Court. 

This case will determine the precedent for future cases regarding human rights, freedoms and protections under The U.S. Constitution regarding healthcare. 

The other part of the case to be determined, would be whether Tennessee could justify the ban. 

At last Wednesday’s hearing, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Samuel Alito spoke in depth about the allegations raised by the state. They also discussed the level of effectiveness, against the levels of risk of gender affirming care. The sources that the Justices referenced have been determined by experts to be unreliable, biased, misleading and inaccurate. They argued that the state has a right to make a decision based on those sources, regardless of their credibility. 

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prologar’s oral argument on behalf of the petitioner stated that this case is about access to medications that have already been safely prescribed and safely used for decades to treat a wide range of conditions, including but not limited to, gender dysphoria. 

“But SB1 singles out and bans one particular use. In Tennessee, these medications can’t be prescribed to allow a minor to identify with or live as a gender inconsistent with the minor’s sex,” argued Solicitor General Porlogar. 

Lambda Legal’s Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project Director, Sasha Buchert commented on the case. 

“Since 2021, 26 states have banned hormone therapies for transgender youth. These are all similar cases introduced by conservative state legislatures targeting trans youth and their families pushed by conservative and far-right groups using copy-cat legislation and peddling misinformation and conspiracy theories,” she explained in a Lambda Legal FAQ

The California Perspective

Though it is believed that there won’t be a decision from the court until sometime in June 2025, local organizations and community leaders have begun to discuss how the future will shape up  once SCOTUS makes a ruling. 

Planned Parenthood in California, issued a statement following the oral arguments case.

“The Planned Parenthood affiliates in California know this playbook all too well and no matter what lies ahead, we are ready to fight to protect the right of transgender people, including youth, to access the care they need and deserve. While some states may be emboldened by the Supreme Court’s eventual decision in this case to criminalize critical health care services once again, California will continue to be a safe haven for transgender people and their health, safety, privacy, and well-being,” said Jodi Hicks CEO and president at Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California.

Bamby Salcedo, president and CEO of the Trans Latin@ Coalition has built her entire career and legacy on championing transgender rights and believes that if the Supreme Court decides to uphold Tennessee’s right to enforce this law, California will also eventually see itself challenged as a safe haven for trans youth, as well as adults.  

“When we launched our policy agenda, we were going to focus the following legislative session in California, on a bill to reform Cal Aid and after the election, we had to rethink that because we know the state gets its funding from the federal government for [programs like] Medical and Medicare.”

Following last Wednesday’s hearing of oral arguments, Attorney General Rob Bonta reinforced California’s commitment toward protecting trans youth and their access to healthcare.  

“Following oral arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti in the Supreme Court, my office reaffirms our unwavering commitment to protecting the health and rights of transgender individuals to access medically necessary care,” said Attorney General Bonta.

 “Laws such as Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1 are dangerous and discriminatory by denying transgender youth the critical, lifesaving care they need. Amid a growing wave of legislative attacks on LGBTQ+ rights, it is more important than ever to stand against these harmful measures. I urge the Supreme Court to protect the rights of transgender youth and ensure they are not denied the care they need to live full and authentic lives.”

In September, General Bonta led a multi-state coalition which included 20 attorney generals to challenge Florida’s law and administrative rule that severely limits access to gender-affirming care. He initially filed the amicus brief on May of last year, stressing California’s efforts and state responsibility in protecting transgender healthcare rights. In the brief, he also stressed the consequences of not receiving appropriate care.

Organizations like TransLatin@ Coalition, Bienestar Human Services and Equality California are amping up their voices and rolling up their sleeves to provide sanctuary, protections and resources to the LGBTQ+ and TGI communities.

The University of California, Los Angeles William’s Institute created an amicus brief which was submitted by Federal Policy Director Elana Redfield and Selendy Gay, a law firm based in New York, on behalf of Senior Scholar of Public Policy Jody Herman and Legal Director Christy Mallory. Herman and Mallory provided the court with appropriate and credible research to help the Justices understand the population affected by gender-affirming care bans and the impacts of the final ruling.

The final decision regarding healthcare for transgender youth won’t be made until June 2025 and regardless of what the outcome is, the decision will set a new standard for how transgender care, rights and issues will be viewed under the Constitution.

Continue Reading

National

Colleagues, politicos mourn death of Los Angeles Blade publisher

‘A trailblazing journalist, publisher, and tireless advocate’

Published

on

Los Angeles Blade Publisher Troy Masters (Blade file photo by Vanessa Pham)

Troy Masters, publisher of the Los Angeles Blade, died on Wednesday Dec. 11, according to a family member. He was 63. The LA County Coroner said the cause of death was suicide.

Masters was a well-respected and award-winning journalist and publisher with decades of experience, mostly in LGBTQ media. In 2017, he became the founding publisher of the Los Angeles Blade, a sister publication of the Washington Blade.

Praise for Masters’s work and dedication to LGBTQ equality and journalism poured in throughout the day.

Equality California released the following statement from Executive Director Tony Hoang: “We at Equality California are heartbroken by the unexpected passing of Troy Masters, a trailblazing journalist, publisher, and tireless advocate for the LGBTQ+ community. Troy’s remarkable career spanned decades, during which he used his voice and platform to amplify the stories of our community and champion the fight for equality.

“His passion for storytelling and relentless pursuit of social justice left an indelible mark on the fight for LGBTQ+ rights. Over many years, Equality California and the Los Angeles Blade have worked hand in hand to ensure LGBTQ+ stories are accurately represented and shared within the Los Angeles community and throughout California. 

“Our thoughts are with his family, friends, and the Los Angeles Blade and Washington Blade teams during this difficult time. We stand in solidarity with them as we honor Troy’s life, legacy, and unwavering dedication to our community. His passing is a profound loss, and he will be deeply missed.

“Rest in power, Troy. Your work will forever live on in the hearts and lives of those you fought so fiercely for.”

California state Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, (D-Los Angeles) said in a statement: “I am terribly saddened to hear of the passing of Troy Masters, a pillar in the LGBTQ+ community. In his many roles, he has covered life in our community and the challenges of our fight for civil rights and social justice.”

L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, in a statement on X, said she would miss Masters’s humor, wit and huge heart and praised his journalistic pursuits and dedication to uplifting the LGBTQ+ community.

Journalist and Blade contributor Jasmyne Cannick also praised Masters, describing him as a mentor.

“Through the years, he was supportive of my work, giving me space and a voice as a columnist and reporter for the Blade newspapers when it mattered most,” she said in on X. “Troy understood the importance of covering the Black LGBTQ+ community and made it a point to ask me what stories they needed to be telling.”

Michael Yamashita, publisher of the Bay Area Reporter, in a statement said, “I have known Troy as a fellow publisher and friend for over 20 years. He was smart and accomplished. More than a few times, he started gay publications — in New York City and Los Angeles. I will miss working with him.”

Dana Piccoli, managing director of News Is Out, a queer media collaborative, wrote: “Troy was a fierce advocate for the LGBTQ+ community and pioneer in queer media. We were lucky to work with him as a member of News Is Out and will forever be grateful for the barriers he broke down for the queer community. Our hearts are with our colleagues at the Los Angeles Blade and the Washington Blade.”

“It has been a tough day for all of us at the Blade,” said Washington Blade editor Kevin Naff. “Troy’s love of queer media and the city of Los Angeles is well known and he will be missed by so many. In his spirit, we will carry on with our mission and we are planning a celebration of his life in the coming months.”

Continue Reading

Los Angeles

Los Angeles Blade publisher Troy Masters dies at 63

Longtime advocate for LGBTQ equality, queer journalism

Published

on

Los Angeles Blade Publisher Troy Masters (Los Angeles Blade file photo)

Troy Masters, publisher of the Los Angeles Blade, died unexpectedly on Wednesday Dec. 11, according to a family member. He was 63. The cause of death was not immediately released.

Masters is a well-respected and award-winning journalist and publisher with decades of experience, mostly in LGBTQ media. He founded Gay City News in New York City in 2002 and relocated to Los Angeles in 2015. In 2017, he became the founding publisher of the Los Angeles Blade, a sister publication of the Washington Blade, the nation’s oldest LGBTQ newspaper.

His family released a statement to the Blade on Thursday. 

“We are shocked and devastated by the loss of Troy,” the statement says. “He was a tireless advocate for the LGBTQ community and leaves a tremendous legacy of fighting for social justice and equality. We ask for your prayers and for privacy as we mourn this unthinkable loss. We will announce details of a celebration of life in the near future.”

The Blade management team released the following statement on Thursday:

“All of us at the Los Angeles Blade and Washington Blade are heartbroken by the loss of our colleague. Troy Masters is a pioneer who championed LGBTQ rights as well as best-in-class journalism for our community. We will miss his passion and his tireless dedication to the Los Angeles queer community.

“We would like to thank the readers, advertisers, and supporters of the Los Angeles Blade, which will continue under the leadership of our local editor Gisselle Palomera, the entire Blade family in D.C. and L.A., and eventually under a new publisher.”

Troy Masters was born April 13, 1961 and is survived by his mother Josie Kirkland and his sister Tammy Masters, along with many friends and colleagues across the country. This is a developing story and will be updated as more details emerge.

From left, Washington Blade Editor Kevin Naff, Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), Ariadne Getty and Los Angeles Blade Publisher Troy Masters attend the Washington Blade’s 50th anniversary gala in 2019. (Washington Blade file photo by Vanessa Pham)
Continue Reading

Montana

Montana Supreme Court blocks ban on healthcare for trans youth

‘Today’s ruling permits our clients to breathe a sigh of relief’

Published

on

(Image by Mehaniq via Bigstock)

The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that SB 99, a 2023 Montana law that bans life-saving gender-affirming care for transgender youth, is unconstitutional under the Montana Constitution’s privacy clause, which prohibits government intrusion into private medical decisions. This ruling will allow Montana communities and families to continue accessing medical treatments for transgender minors with gender dysphoria, the ACLU announced in a statement.

 “I will never understand why my representatives are working to strip me of my rights and the rights of other transgender kids,” Phoebe Cross, a 17-year-old transgender boy told the ACLU. “Just living as a trans teenager is difficult enough, the last thing me and my peers need is to have our rights taken away.”

“Fortunately, the Montana Supreme Court understands the danger of the state interfering with critical healthcare,” said Lambda Legal Counsel Kell Olson. “Because Montana’s constitutional protections are even stronger than their federal counterparts, transgender youth in Montana can sleep easier tonight knowing that they can continue to thrive for now, without this looming threat hanging over their heads.”

“We are so thankful for this opportunity to protect trans youth, their families, and their medical providers from this baseless and dangerous law,” said Malita Picasso, Staff Attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Every day that transgender Montanans are able to access this care is a critical and life-saving victory. We will never stop fighting until every transgender person has the care and support they need to thrive.”

“Today’s ruling permits our clients to breathe a sigh of relief,” said Akilah Deernose, Executive Director of the ACLU of Montana. “But the fight for trans rights is far from over. We will continue to push for the right of all Montanans, including those who are transgender, to be themselves and live their lives free of intrusive government interference.”

The Court found that the Plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their privacy claim, holding: “The Legislature did not make gender-affirming care unlawful. Nor did it make the treatments unlawful for all minors. Instead, it restricted a broad swath of medical treatments only when sought for a particular purpose. The record indicates that Provider Plaintiffs, or other medical professionals providing gender-affirming care, are recognized as competent in the medical community to provide that care.[T]he law puts governmental regulation in the mix of an individual’s fundamental right ‘to make medical judgments affecting her or his bodily integrity and health in partnership with a chosen health care provider.’

Two justices filed a concurrence arguing that the Court should also clarify that discrimination on the basis of transgender status is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Montana’s Equal Protection Clause, the ACLU reported.

Continue Reading

Congress

Protests against anti-trans bathroom policy lead to more than a dozen arrests

Demonstrations were staged outside House Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) office

Published

on

Protest outside House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) office in the Cannon House Office Building (Washington Blade photo by Christopher Kane)

About 15 protestors affiliated with the Gender Liberation Movement were arrested on Thursday for protesting the anti-trans bathroom policy that was introduced by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and enacted last month by U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

Whistleblower Chelsea Manning and social justice advocates Raquel Willis and Renee Bracey Sherman were among those who were arrested in the women’s bathroom and the hallway outside Johnson’s office in the Cannon House Office Building.

Demonstrators held banners reading “FLUSH BATHROOM BIGOTRY” and “CONGRESS: STOP PISSING ON OUR RIGHTS!” They chanted, “SPEAKER JOHNSON, NANCY MACE, OUR GENDERS ARE NO DEBATE!” and “WHEN TRANS FOLKS ARE UNDER ATTACK WHAT DO WE DO? ACT UP, FIGHT BACK!”

Protests began around 12:10 p.m. ET. Within 30 minutes, Capitol Police arrived on the scene, began making arrests, and cleared the area. A spokesperson told Axios the demonstration was an illegal violation of the D.C. code against crowding, obstructing or incommoding.

Mace and her flame-throwing House GOP allies have said the bathroom policy was meant to target Sarah McBride, the Delaware state senator who will become the first transgender member of Congress after she is seated in January.

LGBTQ groups, elected Democrats, and others have denounced the move as a bigoted effort to bully and intimidate a new colleague, with many asking how the policy’s proponents would enforce the measure.

Outside her office in the Longworth House Office Building, the Washington Blade requested comment from Mace about the protests and arrests.

“Yeah, I went to the Capitol Police station where they were being processed, so I’ll be posting what I said shortly,” the congresswoman said.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) (Washington Blade photo by Christopher Kane)

Using an anti-trans slur, Mace posted a video to her X account in which she says, “alright, so some tranny protestors showed up at the Capitol today to protest my bathroom bill, but they got arrested — poor things.”

“So I have a message for the protestors who got arrested,” the congresswoman continued, and then spoke into a megaphone as she read the Miranda warning. “If you cannot afford an attorney — I doubt many of you can — one will be provided to you at the government’s expense,” she said.

“Everyone deserves to use the restroom without fear of discrimination or violence. Trans folks are no different. We deserve dignity and respect and we will fight until we get it,” Gender Liberation Movement co-founder Raquel Willis said in a press release.

“In the 2024 election, trans folks were left to fend for ourselves after nearly $200 million of attack ads were disseminated across the United States,” she said. “Now, as Republican politicians, try to remove us from public life, Democratic leaders are silent as hell.”

Willis continued, “But we can’t transform bigotry and hate with inaction. We must confront it head on. Democrats must rise up, filibuster, and block this bill.”

(Courtesy of the washington blade)

Continue Reading

Politics

Heritage Foundation praises effort to ban transgender healthcare for military families

House GOP signals eagerness to implement Project 2025’s anti-LGBTQ policies

Published

on

President-elect Donald Trump addresses the anti-LGBT Heritage Foundation in 2017. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

In a statement released Tuesday, the conservative Heritage Foundation praised House Republicans’ military spending bill, including the provision added by Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) that would ban gender-affirming healthcare interventions for the children of U.S. service members.

Victoria Coates, vice president of the organization’s Kathyrn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, said the National Defense Authorization Act, which was passed by the U.S. House Rules Committee along party lines on Monday, marks an “important step toward a defense budget that flows from strategy and directs DOD to become as lethal as possible to protect the national security of Americans.”

“The bill authorizes resources for DOD at the border, retains the House’s ban on corrosive race-based policies, eliminates the Senate’s provision to draft our daughters, prohibits transgender surgeries for minors under TRICARE, supports military construction in the Indo-Pacific and shipbuilding, including a third Arleigh Burke–class destroyer, and incremental funding for a second Virginia-class submarine,” Coates said. “These policies in this bill, combined with new military leadership, will make America stronger.” 

In April 2022, the Heritage Foundation published Project 2025, a comprehensive 920-page governing blueprint for President-elect Donald Trump’s second term that proposes radical reforms to imbue the federal government with “biblical principles” and advance a Christian nationalist agenda, including by stripping rights away from LGBTQ Americans while abandoning efforts to promote equality for sexual and gender minorities abroad.

“The next conservative president must make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke culture warriors,” the authors explain on page four, beginning “with deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (“SOGI”), diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term … out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists.”

The document also lays the groundwork for the incoming administration to revive the ban on military service by transgender troops that Trump implemented during his first term, arguing that “gender dysphoria is incompatible with the demands of military service.”

Leading up to the election, when Project 2025 became a political liability for Trump, he tried to distance himself from the document and its policy proposals, but as the New York Times documented, an “analysis of the Project 2025 playbook and its 307 authors and contributors revealed that well over half of them had been in Mr. Trump’s administration or on his campaign or transition teams.”

The Times also noted that Trump has held meetings with Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts and a co-founder, Edwin Feulner.

In October, the Congressional Equality Caucus published a report entitled, “Ripping Away Our Freedoms: How House Republicans are Working to Implement Project 2025’s Assault on LGBTQI+ Americans’ Rights.”

The group’s openly gay chair, U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), noted that “When Republicans took control of the House of Representatives last year, we saw an avalanche of attacks against the LGBTQI+ community.”

The congressman added, “During the past two years, they forced more than 70 anti-LGBTQI+ votes on the House floor. And nearly every bill and amendment idea was ripped out of the pages of Project 2025’s ‘Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise.’”

The NDAA filed by House Republicans is unlikely to pass through the U.S. Senate while the chamber remains under Democratic control, and President Joe Biden has vowed to veto legislation that discriminates against transgender and LGBQ communities, but the spending package will face far fewer obstacles after the new Congress is seated on Jan. 3 and Trump is inaugurated on Jan. 20.

Objecting to the spending bill’s inclusion of language prohibiting military families from accessing gender affirming care are congressional Democrats like U.S. Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.), who serves as the ranking member of the U.S. House Armed Services Committee, and advocacy groups like the Human Rights Campaign and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Continue Reading

State Department

State Department honors Ghanaian LGBTQ+ activist

Ebenezer Peegan among Secretary of State’s Human Rights Defender Award recipients

Published

on

Secretary of State Antony Blinken attends the Human Rights Defender Award Ceremony at the State Department on Dec. 10, 2024. (State Department photo by Chuck Kennedy)

The State Department on Tuesday honored a Ghanaian LGBTQ+ activist and seven other human rights advocates from around the world.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken presented Rightify Ghana Executive Director Ebenezer Peegah with the Secretary of State’s Human Rights Defender Award during a ceremony at the State Department.

“He’s been a prominent figure advocating for equality and justice,” Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Enrique Roig told the Washington Blade on Tuesday during an interview.

The other human rights activists who received the award include:

• Mary Ann Abunda, a migrant workers advocate in Kuwait

• Permanent Human Rights Assembly of Bolivia President Amparo Carvajal

• Aida Dzhumanazarova, country director for the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law in Kyrgyzstan

• Mang Hre Lian, founder of the Chin Media Network in Myanmar

• Juana Ruiz of Asociación Asvidas, an organization that advocates for survivors of gender-based violence in Colombia

• Rufat Sararov, a former prosecutor who runs Defense Line in Azerbaijan

The State Department posthumously honored Thulani Maseko, a prominent human rights activist from Eswatini who was killed in 2023. His wife, Tanele Maseko, accepted the award on his behalf.

The ceremony took place on International Human Rights Day, which commemorates the U.N. General Assembly’s ratification of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Dec. 10, 1948. Sararov did not attend because Azeri authorities arrested him before he could obtain a visa that would have allowed him to travel to the U.S.

Ghanaian Supreme Court to rule on anti-LGBTQ+ law on Dec. 18

Ghanaian lawmakers on Feb. 28 approved the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill that would, among other things, criminalize allyship. President Nana Akufo-Addo has said he will not sign the bill until the Supreme Court rules on whether it is constitutional or not. 

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the law on Dec. 18. John Dramani Mahama, the country’s president-elect, will take office on Jan. 7.

Ruig applauded Peegah’s efforts to highlight the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill.

“For us in the U.S. government, the work that he’s done on this issue has also been instrumental in our own discussions with the current government as well as the incoming administration around the concerns that we’ve expressed with regards to this legislation,” Roig told the Washington Blade “He’s been an important partner in all this as well.”

Peegah on Aug. 14 met with Pope Francis at the Vatican.

Continue Reading

Ghana

Activists: Ghanaian presidential election results will not improve LGBTQ+ rights

Supreme Court on Dec. 18 to rule on anti-LGBTQ+ law

Published

on

Ghanaian President-elect John Dramani Mahama (Photo via John Dramani Mahama Official Instagram)

Former Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama from the opposition National Democratic Congress has won Saturday’s general elections, defeating current Vice President Mahamudu Bawumia of the New Patriotic Party.

The NDC before the election had pledged its support for the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, which would further criminalize LGBTQ+ people and those who support them.

The bill, which MPs approved in February, has yet to be signed by outgoing President Nana Akufo-Addo because of a ruling the Supreme Court is expected to issue on Dec. 18. Richard Dela Sky, a journalist and private lawyer, challenged the law in March.

The NDC, NPP and other parties used recognition of LGBTQ+ rights to persuade Ghanaians to vote for them. Mahama during a BBC interview last week said LGBTQ+ rights are against African culture and religious doctrine.

Berinyuy Hans Burinyuy, LGBT+ Rights Ghana’s director for communications, said homophobic attacks and public demonstrations increased during the campaign.

“The passage of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill into law will institutionalize State-sanctioned discrimination and violence against LGBTQ+ individuals, leaving little to no legal recourse for those affected,” said Burinyuy. “The climate of fear and uncertainty that has gripped Ghana’s LGBTQ+ community cannot be overstated.”

“While the political atmosphere remains hostile, there is still hope that the Supreme Court will rule in favor of human rights and constitutional protections,” added Burinyuy. “Should the court strike down the bill, it will be a significant victory for LGBTQ+ rights and a blow to the growing wave of homophobia that has swept the country.”

Awo Dufie, an intersex person and cross-dresser, said the LGBTQ+ community is going to be at increased risk under the NDC-led government because it supports anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric.

“Mahama supported the anti-LGBT bill as well as the arrest and prosecution of human rights defenders,” noted Dufie. “Politicizing queer rights as a distraction actually started under Atta Mills (the-late president of Ghana) and the NDC government in 2011, and it was an NDC MP (Sam George) who furthered this in 2021 vocalizing support for the anti-LGBT bill.”

Dufie added Ghanaians “voted out a worse corrupt government who had no respect for human rights, and brought in a former corrupt president who has also promised to not respect human rights.”

Activism Ghana, another LGBTQ+ rights group, said the attacks against LGBTQ+ Ghanaians are a series of political ploys designed to win votes as opposed to accelerating development.

“Hate the gays, win the votes, and when they win and fail to deliver development and prosperity, they scapegoat the gays to take away attention from real problems,” said Activism Ghana.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Monday congratulated Mahama’s election, and noted Naana Jane Opoku-Agyemang will become the country’s first female vice president.

“The United States commends the Electoral Commission, its hundreds of thousands of poll workers, civil society, and the country’s security forces, who helped ensure a peaceful and transparent process,” said Blinken in a statement. “We also applaud Vice President Mahamudu Bawumia for his gracious acceptance of the results.”

Mahama’s inauguration will take place on Jan. 7.

Advocacy groups continue to urge Akufo-Addo to veto the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill or amend sections that further criminalize LGBTQ+ people and allies.

Continue Reading

Colombia

Claudia López mum on whether she will run for president of Colombia

LGBTQ+ Victory Institute honored former Bogotá mayor in D.C.

Published

on

Former Bogotá Mayor Claudia López, left, with Minneapolis City Councilwoman Andrea Jenkins at the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute's International LGBTQ Leaders Conference in D.C. on Dec. 8, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

Former Bogotá Mayor Claudia López did not specifically discuss the growing speculation over whether she will run for president of Colombia in 2026 when she spoke at Saturday’s LGBTQ+ Victory Institute’s Annual International LGBTQ Leaders Conference in D.C., or with the Washington Blade.

“In a week I am going to return to Colombia and I’m coming back with a very, very punctual task,” she said in a speech she gave after the Victory Institute inducted her into its LGBTQ+ Political Hall of Fame at the JW Marriott. “Democracy in the world in general needs emotional reconnection.”

López, 54, was a student protest movement leader, journalist, and political scientist before she entered politics.

She returned to Colombia in 2013 after she earned her Ph.D in political science at Columbia University.

In her speech, López said Juan Francisco “Kiko” Gomez, a former governor of La Guajíra Department in northern Colombia, threatened to assassinate her because she wrote about his ties to criminal gangs. A Bogotá judge in 2017 convicted Gómez of ordering members of a paramilitary group to kill former Barrancas Mayor Yandra Brito, her husband and bodyguard, sentencing him to 55 years in prison.

López in 2014 returned to Colombia and ran for the country’s Senate as a member of the center-left Green Alliance party after she recovered from breast cancer. López won after a 10-week campaign that cost $80,000.

“I was the only woman, the only LGBTQ member of my caucus,” she said in her speech. “Of course I had the honor, but also the responsibility to represent them particularly well, [and] of course all the citizens who trust me and all the citizens of Colombia.”

“Once you are elected, you are elected to represent equally and faithfully all of the people, not only your own people,” added López.

In 2018, López was her party’s candidate to succeed then-President Juan Manuel Santos when he left office. López in 2019 became the first woman and first lesbian elected mayor of Bogotá, the Colombian capital and the country’s largest city.

“This of course speaks incredibly well of my city,” she said in her speech.

López took office on Jan. 1, 2020, less than a month after she married her wife, Colombian Sen. Angélica Lozano. (López was not out when she was elected to the Senate.) Lozano was with López at the Victory Institute conference.

López’s term ended on Dec. 31, 2023. She will return to Colombia once her Advanced Leadership Fellowship at Harvard University ends this month.

“I ended my mayorship,” López told the Blade. “It has been, of course, the honor of my life to be the first female mayor of my city. It was an absolutely beautiful job, but very challenging.”

“I needed a year of rest, of relaxation, and I was fortunate to receive a Harvard scholarship this year,” she added.

López during the interview called for an end to polarization and reiterated her support for democracy.

“We need to listen to each other again, we need to have a coffee with each other again, we need to touch each other’s skin,” she said.

López said parties, candidates, and their political coalitions in Colombia and around the world need to “listen, reconnect, and organize with people” at the grassroots level. López also told the Blade there is a “global crisis of democracy.”

“Each country has its own contexts and challenges, but it seems to me that there is a common element there,” she said.

“So, I return to Colombia rested, grateful after a year of reflection, with proposals in mind, but determined to dedicate time to what I consider the most important work for democracy at this time, which is to reconnect from the grassroots,” added López.

‘I know what love and education can do for any person’

López took office less than three months before the COVID-19 pandemic began.

“We were full of hope, ready to go to offer a new social and environmental contract for Bogotá society for the 21st century,” she said. “But a couple of (months) after being sworn into office, the pandemic of COVID-19 came.”

Unemployment and poverty rates soared in Bogotá during the pandemic, and the city’s residents had less access to health care and other basic services.

López noted her administration in response to the pandemic offered scholarships to young people, supported businesses, and increased funding of the city’s social services. López also said her administration implemented Latin America’s first city-based care system for female care givers, and build three more LGBTQ+ community centers in poor and working-class neighborhoods.

“I know what love and education can do for any person,” she said.

Members of Caribe Afirmativo, a Colombian LGBTQ+ rights group, participate in a Pride march in Bogotá, Colombia, in 2022. (Photo courtesy of Caribe Afirmativo)

The U.N. Refugee Agency says upwards of three million Venezuelans are now in Colombia.

Then-Colombian President Iván Duque in February 2021 announced Venezuelan migrants who register with the country’s government will be legally recognized.

Former Bogotá Mayor Gustavo Petro, a former senator who was once a member of the M-19 guerrilla movement that disbanded in the 1990s, succeeded Duque as president on Aug. 7, 2022. Colombia and Venezuela restored diplomatic ties less than a month later.

Venezuela’s National Electoral Council on July 28 declared President Nicolás Maduro the winner of the country’s disputed presidential election. Tamara Adrián, the country’s first transgender congresswoman who ran in the presidential primary earlier this year, are among those who denounced voting irregularities.

WPLG, a South Florida television station on March 16, 2021, reported López sparked controversy after she told reporters there have been “some very violent acts from Venezuelans.”

“First they murder, and then they steal,” she said. “We need guarantees for Colombians.”

López made the comments after a Venezuelan migrant murdered a Colombian police officer in Bogotá.

“The problem is not migration from Venezuela,” López told the Blade in response to a question about Venezuela. “The problem is authoritarianism in Venezuela and you have to keep the focus on it.”

“The problem is what it is: It is not the migrants, it is in Maduro, it is in the dictatorship, it is in authoritarianism.”

(washington blade video by michael k. lavers)

More than 200,000 people died in the war between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia that began in 1962.

Santos and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia Commander Rodrigo “Timochenko” Londoño on Sept 26, 2016, signed an LGBTQ-inclusive peace agreement. Colombian voters a few days later narrowly rejected it a referendum that took place against the backdrop of anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric from religious and conservative groups.

Santos and Londoño less than two months later signed a second peace agreement, which also contains LGBTQ+-specific references.

López described herself as “a person totally committed to the peace process.” She added, however, she has “a bit of a bad taste in my mouth now that I look back.”

“The peace process with the FARC, which was to demobilize the FARC, period, certainly tried to have and had a gender focus, of course a diversity focus, a focus on human rights for all victims, and certainly (the) many LGBT victims who had been victims of FARC recruitment, abuse, stigmatization, etc.,” López told the Blade. “So, in some sense, or in many senses, having that gender and diversity perspective was a way of recognizing the victims of our community.”

She noted opponents lied about the LGBTQ+-specific provisions “to deceive and delegitimize the peace agreement.”

“It is not about making anything invisible, or even downplaying anything, but rather about being much more strategic in understanding that we do not want our flags and causes to be exposed in a way that ends up being a boomerang for our own community,” López added. “So, I say that is why it is a disappointment, because I think it is a lesson. At least for me, it made me think and it makes me think, and I have said it openly since then, that we have to be much more careful and much more, above all, strategic, in how we raise our flags so that they really do not only have symbolic, but real advances and so that in no case do they become a boomerang against ourselves.”

‘I know how you feel’

López during the interview praised the recent elections of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, Uruguayan Vice President Beatriz Argimón, and other women in Latin America. She also expressed sympathy with LGBTQ+ Americans who are concerned about the incoming Trump-Vance administration.

“I know how you feel,” said López in her speech. “I’ve been there when we lost the peace referendum in 2016. I’ve been there when three candidates who represented independent, new alternatives in Colombia, and policies were killed by mafia groups in 1990. I’ve been there when a mafia cartel was able to fund and elect a president for all of us. I’ve been there when paramilitary groups were able to support and elect another president in Colombia.”

“I know how obscure and difficult and challenging and painful democratic times are, but we cannot (back) democracy only when we win,” she added. “It’s precisely when things are challenging, when we suffer defeats that are painful, that we need to attach to our democratic and humanistic values and principles.”

Continue Reading

World

Out in the World: LGBTQ+ news from Canada, Europe, and Asia

Lawmaker urges Hong Kong to ignore relationship recognition court ruling

Published

on

(Los Angeles Blade graphic)

CANADA

Transgender activists in the province of Alberta have filed the first of an expected series of lawsuits against a trio of anti-LGBTQ+ bills passed by the provincial legislature last week

The province’s United Conservative Party government passed the long-promised legislation which bars trans youth under 16 from accessing gender care, bans trans women and girls from women’s sports, requires parental notification and consent if a student under 16 wishes to use a different name or pronoun, and requires parental notification and consent ahead of any discussion of sexual orientation, gender identity or sexuality in classrooms.

On Friday, Canada’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy group Egale filed a joint legal challenge with the Calgary-based trans support center Skipping Stone and five families against the medical care ban, as that bill came into effect immediately upon passage.

“The actions of the government of Alberta are unprecedented. Never before in Canada has a government prohibited access to gender affirming health care,” says Kara Smyth, co-counsel in the case, in a press statement.

Egale says that the law violates the rights of trans people under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the right to security of the person, freedom from cruel and unusual treatment, and equality. 

It also says the law violates Alberta’s recently amended Bill of Rights, including the right to not be subjected to, or coerced into receiving, medical care, medical treatment, or a medical procedure without consent. This was recently added into provincial law as a sop to far-right conspiracy theorists around vaccines in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“This government has acted directly counter to expert guidance and evidence, as well as the voices of Albertan families, and introduced policies that use fear and disinformation to target a small and vulnerable part of the community: 2SLGBTQI young people. All Albertan families and youth deserve the ability to access health care and participate fully in their communities,” says Amelia Newbert, co-founder and managing director of Skipping Stone.

Even if the plaintiffs succeed in court, they may still lose, because Canada’s Charter of Rights includes a clause that allows provincial governments to override fundamental rights. That’s what happened when a court in neighboring Saskatchewan ruled against a law requiring schools to out trans students to their parents.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has so far refused to say whether she’ll invoke the “notwithstanding” clause to override a court decision if the province loses.

And the temperature for LGBTQ+ rights in Alberta keeps getting worse. Also last week, the town of Barrhaven passed a citizen-initiated referendum that bans Pride flags — and all flags other than the Canadian, Albertan, or town flag — from being raised or painted on municipal property. That’s going to require that the city remove a recently installed rainbow crosswalk.

It’s the second town in Alberta to ban the Pride flags this year, after Westlock held a similar referendum in February.

ROMANIA

A scheduled second-round presidential election was cancelled by the Constitutional Court amid allegations that Russia was interfering to aid far-right nationalist Călin Georgescu against progressive reformer Elena Lasconi.

The unprecedented move was condemned by both candidates, who accused Romania’s establishment parties of trying to usurp the democratic process. 

Declassified intelligence reports released by the government assert that Georgescu’s campaign was supported by a Russian influence operation, which was largely played out through a massive TikTok campaign that raised his profile from obscurity to winning the first-round election on Nov. 24. 

Fresh elections will be called by the new parliament that was elected separately on Dec 1. In those elections, establishment parties lost ground — and their parliamentary majority — as three far-right ultranationalist parties made major gains.

Georgescu and the three parties supporting him have long been hostile to LGBTQ+ rights. Lasconi’s record on LGBTQ+ rights is mixed. She’s previously expressed opposition to same-sex marriage, but during the campaign said she would support civil union legislation and eventually would be open to equal marriage. 

Regardless of who wins the election, it is unlikely Romania’s parliament will bring forward much pro-LGBTQ+ rights legislation.

LITHUANIA

A court in Lithuania has for the first time recognized a same-sex partner as a child’s parent, in a groundbreaking ruling in a country where same-sex couples and families have few legal rights.

The Vilnius District Court ruling came into effect on Friday, recognizing both women as the child’s parent, LRT English reports.

The couple at the center of the case are Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson Birutė Sabatauskaitė and her partner Jūratė Juškaitė, director of the Lithuanian Center for Human Rights. Juškaitė will now be able to have her name listed as a parent on all of her daughter’s documents, giving her all the rights of a mother.

“From today, our family feels safer. The Vilnius District Court’s ruling that recognises me as the mother of our little girl has come into effect,” Juškaitė posted on Facebook.

While the case does not set a legal precedent, it shows that the Lithuanian courts are open to same-sex couples in the interest of protecting family rights and children’s rights. 

“Family cases are very individual, but yes, it could certainly inspire and give hope to families who don’t fit into the traditional definition of a family,” says Donatas Murauskas, who represented Juškaitė in court.

Same-sex couples are not generally afforded legal recognition or any of the rights that married heterosexual couples have in Lithuania. A bill to recognize civil partnerships awaits a final vote in the Lithuanian parliament, but the newly elected government, a coalition of Social Democrats and nationalists, has not agreed to put the bill in their program. 

CHINA

A Hong Kong lawmaker is calling on the city to ignore last year’s Court of Final Appeal ruling ordering the government to recognize same-sex unions, and is urging the city to instead appeal to mainland China to overrule the court.

Under the “One Country, Two Systems” form of government that Hong Kong has had since the end of the British colonial period in 1997, the city enjoys limited autonomy from Beijing. But China has the power to intervene on matters with “permanent, serious consequences.”

Lawmaker Junius Ho says that a series of Court of Final Appeal rulings that require the city to recognize same-sex couples and grant them equal access to public housing and inheritance rights are serious enough to warrant intervention from Beijing.

He made the comments at a forum hosted by a group he founded to fight the rulings, International Probono Legal Services Association Limited.

“The Court of Final Appeal [made these rulings] on so-called same-sex marriages under just one notion, equal rights. What equal rights? Diversity, inclusiveness and equality,” Ho said. “[These] universal values cannot override the constitution.”

Last year, the Court of Final Appeal gave the city two years to establish a legal mechanism to recognize same-sex couples, but LGBTQ+ activists have been frustrated by the lack of legislative progress on the issue.

Even as same-sex couples have continued to win victories in court, queer people have noticed that space for free expression has shrunk as the government has cut funding for LGBTQ+ service organizations and it has become more risky to accept funding from foreign sources amid a broader crackdown from the mainland on Hong Kong’s democratic institutions.

Continue Reading

Popular