By Erin Reed | ATLANTA, Ga. – On Monday, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that transgender health insurance exclusions violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The case was brought by a transgender employee of the Houston County Sheriff’s Office in Georgia who was denied coverage for gender-affirming surgery.

The employee sued in 2019, and after a protracted lawsuit, won at the district court level. Now, with this 11th Circuit Court ruling in favor of transgender employees, a significant precedent is building to protect transgender employees against health insurance restrictions that deny them the ability to get gender-affirming care.

The employee in question first transitioned in 2017. After informing Sheriff Cullen Talton at the Houston County Sheriff’s Office of her decision to transition, she was told that he “does not believe in” being transgender, but that she would be allowed to keep her job.

However, when it came time to obtain gender-affirming surgery, significant controversy erupted: her claims were denied. When she filed a lawsuit to have her surgery covered, the sheriff’s office and county fought against her right to equitable health care coverage.

Since then, the county has spent incredible amounts of money denying the plaintiff her care. As of 2023, Houston County, Georgia, had spent $1,188,701 fighting against providing health care coverage for the transgender plaintiff.

This is significant: ProPublica reports that it is over three times the county’s annual physical and mental health budget. Importantly, no other employee has requested coverage for gender-affirming surgery, so fighting against coverage has significantly cost the county far more than it would have gained by simply providing the employee with that coverage.

Ultimately, a lower court ruled in her favor, stating that such exclusions violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In the decision, the judge stated, “the implication of Bostock is clear… discrimination on the basis of transgender status is discrimination on the basis of sex and is a violation of Title VII.”

The judge then ruled that the exclusion was facially discriminatory and violates Title VII. In doing so, he ordered that the county must drop such exclusions. The plaintiff was also awarded $60,000 following the ruling.

The county appealed the ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which seemed primed to potentially reverse it. Recently, the 11th Circuit has issued harsh rulings toward transgender individuals, such as a ruling that gender-affirming care bans for transgender youth do not violate Equal Protection and Due Process rights.

In this particular case, though, the court considered a different argument: whether such exclusions on transgender insurance coverage violate employment law under the Civil Rights Act. The 11th Circuit concluded that they did: “The exclusion is a blanket denial of coverage for gender-affirming surgery… because transgender persons are the only plan participants who qualify for gender-affirming surgery, the plan denies health care coverage based on transgender status.”

In making its decision, the court referenced two recent developments that may change the legal landscape for transgender people.

In one footnote, the court mentioned Kadel v. Folwell, a case just decided in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, with the court ruling that discrimination against transgender health care violates the Equal Protection Clause. Though it does not reference the case elsewhere, the 11th Circuit used similar legal arguments: that you cannot circumvent discrimination cases by discriminating by proxy. In this case, like in the Kadel case, the judge ruled that discriminating against transgender health care is also discriminating against transgender status.

The judge ruled that the defendant’s “sex is inextricably tied to the denial of coverage for gender-affirming surgery,” and thus, one cannot circumvent discrimination statutes by claiming they are only discriminating against a procedure and not a category of people.

Federal court rules employer cannot deny Trans healthcare coverage

The court also referenced new Title VII guidance from the Biden administration in a footnote when making its decision that exclusions violate those regulations. On April 29, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued updated guidance stating that Title VII protections include protections on gender identity.

Although the guidance does not have the force of law, “numerous courts, including the Supreme Court, have said: Because these guidelines are based on the expertise and careful reasoning of the agency that’s charged with enforcing anti-discrimination laws, they’re to be given deference by the courts,” Christopher Ho, the director of the National Origin and Immigrants’ Rights Program at Legal Aid at Work, stated in an interview with the Washington Post at the time of the guidelines’ release. Now, it appears that a major court, which has ruled against transgender rights in the past, has indeed given those guidelines some credit in their ruling.

The ruling is significant and will likely be one of the many rulings referenced whenever such cases eventually reach the Supreme Court. Multiple courts have ruled in favor of transgender people and their health care, but some significant courts, including in a recent decision by the 11th Circuit Court on health care for transgender youth, have ruled against such legal protections. It is likely that this decision will be cited favorably in many other court cases in the coming months.

******************************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman (she/her pronouns) and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was first published at Erin In The Morning and is republished with permission.

MINEOLA, N.Y. –  A judge from the Nassau County Supreme Court has struck down Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman’s February 22, 2024 executive order banning transgender girls and women from participating in girls’ and women’s sports at county-run facilities.  

In March, the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit challenging Blakeman’s executive order on behalf of the Long Island Roller Rebels, a Nassau County recreational women’s flat track roller derby league. Under the executive order, the league, which welcomes trans women, was barred from using Nassau County’s facilities. 

The lawsuit argues that the policy violates New York’s Human Rights Law and Civil Rights Law, which explicitly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity following passage of New York’s Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA).  

This past Friday, Nassau County Supreme Court Judge Francis Ricigliano ruled that Blakeman did not have the authority to issue such an order. “In doing so, this Court finds the County Executive acted beyond the scope of his authority as the Chief Executive Officer of Nassau County,” Ricigliano wrote.

Judge Ricigliano also noted that Blakeman could not act without corresponding action by the Nassau County Legislature. It includes representatives from each of the county’s 19 districts.

Reacting Blakeman responded in a statement, saying, “Lack of courage from a Judge who didn’t want to decide the case on its merits. Unfortunately, girls and women are hurt by the Court.”

“We are gratified the court has struck down a harmful policy that belongs in the dustbin of history,” said Gabriella Larios, staff attorney at the New York Civil Liberties Union. “The ruling deals a serious blow to County Executive Blakeman’s attempt to score cheap political points by peddling harmful stereotypes about transgender women and girls. We will continue to ensure that the attacks against LGBTQ+ rights that are sweeping the nation will not stand in New York.”  

“Today’s decision is a victory for those who believe that transgender people have the right to participate in sports just like everyone else. It sends a strong message that transphobic discrimination cannot stand,” said Curly Fry, president of Long Island Roller Rebels. “As a league welcoming trans women and committed to providing a safe space for everyone to be their full selves, County Executive Blakeman’s order tried to punish us just because we believe in inclusion and stand against transphobia. Trans people belong everywhere including in sports, and they will not be erased.” 

In early April, U.S. District Court Judge Nusrat Choudhury, who is on the bench of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, denied Blakeman’s request for a temporary restraining order against New York Attorney General Letitia James.

On March 1st, the New York State Attorney General sent a order of cease and desist to Blakeman demanding that the Republican Nassau County Executive rescind his February 22 directive within five days or else face additional legal actions. 

“The law is perfectly clear: you cannot discriminate against a person because of their gender identity or expression. We have no room for hate or bigotry in New York,” the Attorney General wrote. “This executive order is transphobic and blatantly illegal. Nassau County must immediately rescind the order, or we will not hesitate to take decisive legal action.” 

The Nassau County Executive then announced he was filing a lawsuit over the Attorney General’s actions.

WASHINGTON – Citing the rising numbers of violent threats primarily across the digital landscape online including emailed bomb and death threats, officials from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Homeland Security Investigations have issued warnings that foreign terrorist organizations (FTOS) or their supporters are targeting the LGBTQ+ community during Pride Month.

In a notice released on May 10, the FBI and HSI warn that efforts to commit or inspire violence against LGBTQ+ celebrations, including Pride celebrations or other LGBTQ+-related venues, are compounded by the current heightened threat environment in the United States and other western countries. 

The FBI and HSI noted that June 12, 2024 marks the eighth anniversary of the Pulse Nightclub Orlando shooting, during which the attacker killed 49 and wounded 53 people. After the Pulse shooting, pro-ISIS messaging praised this attack as one of the high-profile attacks in Western countries, and FTO supporters celebrated it. There are concerns that instances like the Pulse anniversary could spark a violent attack.

In addition to the threats posed by off-shore groups, increased threat levels domestically including recently documented instances of homophobic and transphobic threats exemplified recently from reporting by multiple media outlets regarding Libs of TikTok’s creator Chaya Raichik, who had initiated an ongoing campaign against Planet Fitness, demanding a boycott in retaliation for the gym’s trans-inclusive locker room policy.

At least 53 locations of Planet Fitness have reported hoax bomb threats in recent weeks, the threats were primarily reported through emails, and in some cases, phone calls. continuing what has become a trend of violent threats against institutions targeted by Raichik. 

Raichik has a long documented history of fostering anti-LGBTQ+ animus through her posts which in turn has led to what NBC News, Media Matters, the SPLC, the Blade, and others documenting Raichik’s anti-LGBTQ+ acts of arguably stochastic terrorism.

In February, NBC News technology reporter David Ingram, detailed bomb threats and violent threats inspired by Raichik’s social media posts. NBC News identified 33 instances, starting in November 2020, when people or institutions singled out by Libs of TikTok later reported bomb threats or other violent intimidation. 

During his April 11 testimony on Capitol Hill, FBI Director Christopher Wray issued a warning to lawmakers telling a House subcommittee that there is a growing fear among law enforcement officials of possible “coordinated attack” inside the U.S. telling committee members that a “lone-wolf” attack promulgated by events in Middle East are the agency’s overarching worry.

Speaking with the Blade on background, a senior FBI official noted that Pride events in locales other than major urban settings, particularly the largest Pride gatherings in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Washington D.C. which have a traditionally large police presence, smaller cities and towns are at elevated risk.

In an emailed statement, the FBI said it has, in general, observed an increase in threats of violence targeting institutions like hospitals and schools.

“As a country and organization, we have seen an increase in threats of violence targeting government officials and institutions, houses of worship, schools, and medical facilities, just to name a few. The FBI and our partners take all threats of violence seriously and responding to these threats ties up law enforcement resources.

“When the threats are made as a hoax, it puts innocent people at risk, is a waste of law enforcement’s limited resources, and costs taxpayers. The FBI and our state and local partners will continue to aggressively pursue perpetrators of these threats — real or false — and hold them accountable,” the FBI statement said.”

Reacting to the elevated threat levels in a statement, GLAAD President Sarah Kate Ellis said:

“A fringe few extremists, domestically and overseas, are irrationally threatened by the rising tide of acceptance for LGBTQ people. It is important to keep Prides safe for all attendees, and for people to keep showing up during Pride and throughout the year to speak up for the equality and safety of their communities and all marginalized people.”

The FBI is asking that Pride event planners, organizers, and others be aware of possible indicators of potential threat activity:

• Violent threats made online, in person, or via mail.
• Unusual or prolonged testing or probing of security measures at events or venues.
• Photography of security related equipment, personnel, or access points consistent with pre-operational surveillance without a reasonable alternative explanation.
• Unusual surveillance or interest in buildings, gatherings, or events.
• Attempts to gain access to restricted areas, bypass security, or impersonate law enforcement officials.
• Observation of or questions about facility security measures, including barriers, restricted areas, cameras, and intrusion detection systems without a reasonable alternative explanation.
• Eliciting information from facility personnel regarding the nature of upcoming events, crowd sizes, busiest times of day, etc. without a reasonable alternative explanation.
• Attempts to enter a restricted area, bypass security, or impersonate law enforcement officials.

ENTEBBE, Uganda — Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni on May 10 met with U.S. Ambassador to Uganda William Popp.

Museveni in a post to his X account described the meeting, which took place at his official residence in Entebbe, as “productive.”

“We discussed key issues, such as the upcoming Census, regional peace, and socio-economic development. I emphasized the need for an inclusive census for informed decision-making,” said Museveni. “I also shared my views on fostering peace and security in the region. Additionally, we discussed opportunities in transitioning our population from a rural-based pre-capitalist society to industry and services.”

I had a productive meeting with the US Ambassador to Uganda, H.E William Popp, at State House Entebbe. We discussed key issues such as the upcoming census, regional peace, and socio-economic development. I emphasized the need for an inclusive census for informed decision-making.… pic.twitter.com/yHRZPHEltZ

— Yoweri K Museveni (@KagutaMuseveni) May 9, 2024

A statement the Ugandan Foreign Affairs Ministry released noted Popp “conveyed his appreciation for the president’s valuable time and wise counsel.” 

“He also acknowledged President Museveni’s extensive knowledge and experience, underscoring the importance of their continued dialogue in fostering a strong and mutually beneficial relationship between the United States and Uganda,” said the statement.

The statement further notes Foreign Affairs Minister Jele Odongo; Defense and Veterans Affairs Minister Jacob Oboth-Oboth; Rosette Byengoma of the Defense Ministry; and Lt. Gen. Samuel Okiding, who is deputy chief of the Ugandan defense forces, attended the meeting.

The meeting took place nearly a year after Museveni signed the Anti-Homosexuality Act that, among other things, contains a death penalty provision for “aggravated homosexuality.”

The U.S. has sanctioned Ugandan officials and removed the country from a duty-free trade program. The World Bank Group also suspended new loans to Uganda in response to the Anti-Homosexuality Act.

The Ugandan Constitutional Court last month refused to “nullify the Anti-Homosexuality Act in its totality.” A group of Ugandan LGBTQ+ activists have appealed the ruling.

It is not clear whether Popp raised the Anti-Homosexuality Act with Museveni during their meeting.

The State Department referred the Washington Blade to the U.S. Embassy in Kampala, the Ugandan capital, for comment. The embassy did not respond to a request for comment.

By Ethan Dewitt | CONCORD, N.H. – In early May, Democrats in the House defeated the “Honesty in Education Act.” The bill was the latest effort to require public school teachers to answer parents when they ask about changes to their child’s gender identity. 

But another bill is moving forward that supporters say would give parents more control over their children’s instruction in schools – and opponents say would intrude on classroom instruction.

House Bill 1312 would allow parents to opt their children out of any “instruction or program of” sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or gender expression. 

Currently, state law allows parents to withdraw their children from classes related to human sexual education. HB 1312 would expand that ability to apply to the additional topics. 

Under the existing process, parents must notify the school district in writing that they object to the class material. And the parents must propose alternative instruction that is agreed upon by the school district, and pay for it themselves if there is a cost.

HB 1312 would expand the withdrawal and require school district staff to notify parents at least two weeks in advance of any material that might fall into the category. 

Separately, the bill would prevent school districts from requiring that teachers withhold information from parents about their child’s well-being – including information about their sexuality. Individual teachers could still choose not to answer questions from parents about their child’s sexuality, but school districts could not make it a blanket policy under the bill.

The legislation, which passed the House 186-185, appears likely to clear the Republican-led Senate, too; the Senate Education Committee voted to recommend that it pass, in a 3-1, party-line vote. 

Supporters say the bill would give parents a greater say in how their children learn about sensitive topics. But opponents said the bill would empower discriminatory views against LGBTQ+ people, and that the notification process would be disruptive to teachers.

“The bill seems to be targeting, and I think stigmatizing, any instruction concerning LGBTQ+ people, and I think that this language really sends the message to LGBTQ+ students that their feelings and identities are something to be shunned, feared, potentially even censored, or not even acknowledged,” said Gilles Bissonnette, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire. 

To Sen. Tim Lang, a Sanbornton Republican, the bill would encourage parents to communicate with their children about the topics – knowing that they were coming up in the curriculum – which he said could foster better connections between parents and children.

“Parents should have these discussions with their own children and not have teachers do this. This bill is the prompt for parents to have those conversations.”

Lang said the notification requirements would not prevent school districts from teaching the topics, but would rather allow parents to choose whether to participate in them. And he argued that the bill is not intended to allow parents to withdraw their child from materials that relate to LGBTQ+ people or movements in history.

“It’s just informative to parents,” he said. “Nothing stops the school from doing those classes. The class is allowed. That just says that if you do it though, because this is a sensitive topic, you need to notify parents.”

A class about Harvey Milk, the openly gay San Francisco politician who was assassinated in 1978, would not fall under the definition of instruction of sexual orientation, Lang said, because Milk was a historical figure. But any instruction directed at students themselves that delved into their own sexual orientations or gender identity – such as that in a sex education class – would need to be disclosed, he said. 

But representatives of teachers unions said the bill as written does not make those distinctions clear. Teachers might interpret the law to mean that any class that discussed the history of LGBTQ+ rights would need to be noticed ahead of time, opponents said. And English teachers might feel compelled to disclose any book that featured LGBTQ+ characters, and to empower parents to prevent their children from reading those books.

“If you pass this bill that expands the areas that a parent is required notification of and can opt a child out of, where will it stop?” said Deb Howes, president of the American Federation of Teachers of New Hampshire. “… Can you study the pay gap between men and women in the same jobs in an economics class, which has to do with policies around gender discrimination?”

Lang disagreed with that characterization; books that happen to include transgender or non-heterosexual characters would not automatically invoke the disclosure requirement, he said. Only instruction that was specifically intended to teach students about sexual orientation or gender identity would need advanced notice, he said.

Brian Hawkins, director of government relations for the National Education Association of New Hampshire, argued that the topics the bill would add to the parental notification law were so broad that teachers would find the law difficult to follow. 

“We think that 1312 is another piece of legislation that would significantly limit educators’ ability to teach, and provides far too many instances of vague language and framework to determine when certain actions violate the statute,” Hawkins said. 

New Hampshire lawmakers first passed the law allowing parental opt-out from sex ed in 2017. In recent years, Republicans have pushed to allow more parental control over school library books, and have pressed for legislation to require teachers to answer any questions from parents about their child’s preferred pronouns or gender identity in school. 

The latest parental notification bill effort, Senate Bill 341, was “indefinitely postponed” earlier this month, on a voting day when House Democrats had a majority over Republicans in the near-evenly divided chamber. That motion means that the bill is dead and that it cannot return as an amendment to another bill this legislative session.

******************************************************************************************

Ethan DeWitt is the New Hampshire Bulletin’s education reporter. Previously, he worked as the New Hampshire State House reporter for the Concord Monitor, covering the state, the Legislature, and the New Hampshire presidential primary. A Westmoreland native, Ethan started his career as the politics and health care reporter at the Keene Sentinel. Email: [email protected]

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the New Hampshire Bulletin and is republished with permission.

The independent, nonprofit New Hampshire Bulletin is guided by these words from our state constitution: “Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive.” We will work tirelessly every day to make sure elected officials and state agencies are held to that standard.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – Over the past few weeks, Dr. Hillary Cass has begun giving interviews in the United States to defend her report targeting transgender care. The Cass Review has faced criticism for its alleged anti-trans political ties, biased findings, promotion of conversion therapists, and poor treatment of evidence regarding transgender care.

In an interview with NPR, Dr. Cass claimed that transgender individuals’ care should be judged by their “employment,” rather than their satisfaction with the care received. Later, during an interview with The New York Times, Cass misleadingly stated that she had not been contacted by any lawmakers or U.S. health bodies, despite having met with political appointees of Gov. Ron DeSantis to discuss banning trans care before her report was published.

In response, both the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Endocrine Society have categorically rejected the review as a justification for bans on care and have challenged many of its alleged findings.

In a statement released by the Endocrine Society, they reiterated that they stand by their guidelines around the provision of gender affirming care for transgender youth: “We stand firm in our support of gender-affirming care. Transgender and gender-diverse people deserve access to needed and often life-saving medical care. NHS England’s recent report, the Cass Review, does not contain any new research that would contradict the recommendations made in our Clinical Practice Guideline on gender-affirming care… Medical evidence, not politics, should inform treatment decisions.”

The Endocrine Society defended its guidelines, highlighting that they cite over 260 research studies to support their recommendations on transgender care. Moreover, the guidelines were developed with input from more than 18,000 members who had the opportunity to comment.

This process is notably more transparent than the Cass Review, whose advisory members have been kept secret. Investigations have revealed that several members are part of an anti-trans lobbying organization, SEGM, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has described as “the hub” of an “anti-LGBTQ pseudoscience network.”

“Although the scientific landscape has not changed significantly, misinformation about gender-affirming care is being politicized. In the United States, 24 states have enacted laws or policies barring adolescents’ access to gender-affirming care, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. In seven states, the policies also include provisions that would prevent at least some adults over age 18 from accessing gender-affirming care,” the Endocrine Society Letter reads, “Transgender and gender-diverse teenagers, their parents, and physicians should be able to determine the appropriate course of treatment. Banning evidence-based medical care based on misinformation takes away the ability of parents and patients to make informed decisions..”

You can see the Endocrine Society’s release here:

Similar sentiments were shared by Dr. Ben Hoffman, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, who responded to the Cass Review, “What we’re seeing more and more is that the politically infused public discourse is getting this wrong and it’s impacting the way that doctors care for their patients. Physicians must be able to practice medicine that is informed by their medical education, training, experience, and the available evidence, freely and without the threat of punishment. Instead, state legislatures have passed bills to ban and restrict gender-affirming care, which means that right now, for far too many families, their zip code determines their ability to seek the health care they need. Politicians have inserted themselves into the exam room, and this is dangerous for both physicians and for families.”

Transgender care saves lives. A Cornell review of more than 51 studies determined that trans care significantly improves the mental health of transgender people. One major study even noted a 73% lower suicidality among trans youth who began care.

In a recent article published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in April of 2024, puberty blockers were found to significantly reduce depression and anxiety. In Germany, a recent review by over 27 medical organizations has judged that “not providing treatment can do harm” to transgender youth.

The evidence around transgender care led to a historic policy resolution condemning bans on gender affirming care by the American Psychological Association, the largest psychological association in the world, which was voted on by representatives of its 157,000 members.

Interestingly, Cass herself advocated against care bans in her most recent New York Times interview released today, where she stated, “There are young people who absolutely benefit from a medical pathway, and we need to make sure that those young people have access,” although she added a caveat that those young people should be forced to consent to research in order to access care, leaving many to question the ethics of such an approach.

Transition should be measured by “employment,” not satisfaction

Regardless of Cass’s statements, her review is being used to justify bans in the United States and worldwide. In the United Kingdom, her report has led to bans on puberty blockers in England and even inquiries into adult care.

In the United States, Senators in South Carolina used it to pass a total care ban for trans youth in the state. Now, major medical organizations have responded firmly against the idea that evidence around gender affirming care is weak, challenging states who use such misleading claims to ban transgender care as practicing politics, not medicine.

You can find the statements from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Endocrine Society here:

Endocrine Society Cass Statement:

Download

AAP Cass Statement:

Download

******************************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman (she/her pronouns) and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was first published at Erin In The Morning and is republished with permission.

By James Brooks | JUNEAU, Alaska – The Alaska House of Representatives voted 22-18 late Sunday to ban transgender girls from girls’ school sports teams by limiting access to girls whose original birth certificates identify them as girls.

The decision followed hours of filibustering by a coalition of opponents, but supporters mustered enough votes to defeat dozens of amendments offered by those opponents and advanced House Bill 183 to the state Senate, where the proposal is expected to die without becoming law.

Though the Senate has said it will not hear the bill and there are no known transgender athletes in Alaska school sports, it was nonetheless a top priority for most of the House’s Republicans, who said they were responding to their constituents.

Rep. Jamie Allard, R-Anchorage, said she believes transgender girls are boys, and that the House Republicans were standing in support of other Alaskans who feel the same.

“I want you to know Alaska stands with you. I stand with you. I know my majority members stand with them too. To the parents of the children of Alaska, know we will fight. We will fight for your children. We will fight for your girls in sports,” she said.

Opponents of the bill said that if the proposal ever were to become law, it would immediately draw legal challenges for being discriminatory.

“Trans girls are girls. Our gender identity is determined in our brains, it is coded, it is fixed,” said Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage, who opposed the bill. “99.5% of us have a gender identity in our brains that matches our physical bodies, half a percent does not.”

Rep. CJ McCormick, D-Bethel, has suffered from a spinal condition since he was young. Speaking on the House floor, he said he was bullied and teased in school for being different. 

“I am a Bethel kid. I grew up in rural Alaska. I grew up with a rare spinal condition. Kids used to beat me up, just made fun of my neck,” he said.

He became friends with some of those bullies because of a shared love of sports, and he vehemently opposed the bill because it puts barriers in sports for children, he said.

“All of this debate is — we’re talking about kids! We’re talking about kids. We are attacking children!” he said.

Rep. Alyse Galvin, I-Anchorage, is the mother of a transgender daughter, and said she finds it hard to believe that Alaskans place this issue as a top priority. She said she believes “outside agitators” and social media have spun people up on the issue, but that can be overcome.

“I think we look within. We tune out the outside voices of hate, and discord. And we focus on our inside voice of love, empathy, compassion, understanding all the things that we were taught. The only way we are going to change the direction of the harmful discourse is to leave it from our hearts,” she said.

The final vote saw all 20 Republicans in the House’s majority caucus vote in favor of the bill, as did Reps. David Eastman, R-Wasilla, and Dan Ortiz, I-Ketchikan.

All of the House’s Democrats voted against the bill, as did all of its independents, with the exception of Ortiz. Rep. Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak and a minority-caucus member, was the lone Republican to vote against it.

After the bill’s passage, Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage, requested a re-vote, which may take place Tuesday. The bill is still expected to pass on that re-vote, though the vote total may change.

******************************************************************************************

James Brooks is a longtime Alaska reporter, having previously worked at the Anchorage Daily News, Juneau Empire, Kodiak Mirror and Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. A graduate of Virginia Tech, he is married to Caitlyn Ellis, owns a house in Juneau and has a small sled dog named Barley. He can be contacted at [email protected].

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the Alaska Beacon and is republished with permission.

The Alaska Beacon is an independent, nonpartisan news organization focused on connecting Alaskans to their state government. Our journalists fairly and fearlessly report on the people and interests that determine state policy.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

EUROVISION

MALMO, Sweden – Swiss Singer Nemo won the Eurovision Song Contest with their operatic pop-rap song “The Code,” about their journey to accepting their nonbinary identity. 

“I went to Hell and back, To find myself on track, I broke the code,” Nemo sang in the chorus of his winning song.

Dressed in a frilly pink blouse and miniskirt, Nemo dazzled the audience at the Malmo Arena in Sweden, home to last year’s winner, Loreen.

Nemo’s win is the first win for Switzerland since Canadian singer Celine Dion competed under the Swiss flag in 1988.

The Eurovision Song Contest is an annual competition held by the European Broadcasting Union since 1956, in which representatives of all member states present original songs. The entrants are voted upon by a panel of judges and by viewing audiences, who award points to their ten favorite performances. 

Over the years, the competition has become well-known as a camp spectacle and a favorite event for the European LGBT community, with many high-profile queer competitors and winners, including Austrian drag queen Conchita Wurst, who returned to this year’s show to perform a tribute to ABBA, who won the competition for Sweden with the song “Waterloo” in 1974.

This year’s UK entrant was openly gay performer Olly Alexander, formerly of the band Years & Years. His song “Dizzy,” a homoerotic pop-dance track that featured a quartet of dancing boxers, finished in 18^th place with only 46 points, after receiving no points from the voting audience.

This year’s competition was not without controversy. 

The venue was met with a large protest demanding that Israel, which has competed in Eurovision since 1973, be removed from the competition due to the ongoing war in Gaza. Additional security measures were put in place for the competition

Israel’s entrant, Edan Golan, had been a favorite early in the competition, but her song “Hurricane” finished fifth. The song had also drawn controversy, and Golan was ordered to change the title and lyrics by the EBU from “October Rain” due to its references to the October 7 attacks on Israel. 

Golan travelled with agents of the Israeli Security Agency Shin Bet after death threats were made on her social media. 

Additionally, Dutch performer Joost Klein was disqualified ahead of the final competition after an alleged altercation with a female production staffer that has led to a police investigation.

UNITED KINGDOM

LONDON, United Kingdom – Actor Ian Gelder, best known for his role as Kevan Lannister in the HBO series Game of Thrones has passed away at age 74, five months after he was diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer.

Gelder’s husband Ben Daniels announced his passing in a post on Instagram on Tuesday.

“It is with huge, huge sadness and a heavy heart broken into a million pieces that I’m leaving this post to announce the passing of my darling husband and life partner Ian Gelder,” Daniels wrote in the caption of a photo taken of the couple at Christmas, shortly after Gelder’s first round of treatment for his cancer.

“He was my absolute rock and we’d been partners for more than 30 years. If we weren’t together, we spoke to each other every day. He was the kindest, most generous spirited and loving human being. He was a wonderful, wonderful actor and everyone who worked with him was touched by his heart and light,” Daniels wrote.

Gelder was diagnosed with bile duct cancer in December. Such cancers are often not detected by health care providers until they have spread to other parts of the body. 

Gelder had a long career in film and television and on the British stage, frequently appearing on London’s West End and Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre. 

Among his numerous television appearances was a stint on the Doctor Who spinoff Torchwood, and the celebrated UK sitcom Absolutely Fabulous.

POLAND

ŁÓDŹ, Poland – Declaring that she would “go to hell and make a deal with the devil” to advance the rights of Poland’s LGBTQ community, Equalities Minister Katarzyna Kotula joined the Equality March in Łódź, the country’s fourth-largest city, on May 11.

The March was the 13^th edition of the event, and the first time it had been attended by a government minister. 

Last year, Poland elected a new government coalition of center-left leaning parties that have pledged to support LGBT rights, a sharp contrast to the right-wing, LGBT-hostile government that preceded them. 

Still, the government has been slow to act on its stated promises to the LGBT community, including a law on civil unions, a ban on hate speech, and a gender recognition act, amid squabbling from more conservative members of the coalition. 

Kotula has said that she’s waiting to introduce the civil union bill until she can get agreement from the coalition on key sticking points, including adoption rights. 

“For civil partnerships, for marriage equality, for the Gender Reconciliation Act, for dignity and human rights for the LGBT community, I will go to hell and make a pact with the devil. I promise that when we meet here next year, at least some of these demands will be implemented,” Kotula said at the March. “I will do everything to take care of your dignity and your safety.”

The organizers of the march, The Equality Factory, are calling for even greater rights, including full marriage equality, abortion and contraception rights, comprehensive sex education in schools, and facilitation of medical treatment for gender transition. 

“We are marching because words about equality cannot be thrown around. We are not a bargaining chip. We were promised something and the election promises should be fulfilled. The most important requirement to be implemented is the Act on civil partnerships. This is not only about LGBTQ+ people, but also about protecting heterosexual people in relationships, because there is no such thing as cohabitation in Polish law. This should be important for all Poles,” Ida Mickiewicz-Florczak from the Equality Factory told the Polish news site Odaka.

Even if the civil partnership law passes through Parliament, it may face a veto from President Andrzej Duda of the opposition Law and Justice Party, which has vociferously opposed LGBT rights. So far, Duda, who will be in office until presidential elections in May 2025, has not indicated how he will act on the bill, stating he’s waiting until it is introduced to comment.

SOUTH KOREA

SEOUL, South Korea – The Seoul Queer Culture Festival has found a new home after two years of struggle with the city council repeated denying permits for the annual festival.

The Queer Culture Festival had been held at Seoul Plaza at city hall ever since 2015, but last year it was denied a permit, which the conservative-leaning city council decided to give to a Christian youth concert instead. This year, the city council has announced that the plaza is being used for a outdoor library all through spring and summer, effectively blocking all event applications.

“I think Seoul city is focusing on events that only suit its taste,” Yang Sun-woo, chief organiser of the festival, told Reuters. “If Seoul cared about LGBT people, they would have understood the significance of the event,” Yang said.

In response, organizers of the Queer Culture Festival have decided this year’s edition will take place on a several blocks in downtown Seoul, which only required the permission of police, rather than city council.

The festival, which takes place over two weeks in June, kicks off with a parade on June 1 and will feature a queer film festival, live performances, and 60 booths for vendors and interactive events.

For its part, Seoul City Council denies that anti-LGBT discrimination played a part in its decision to twice deny permits for the event. 

The city government said it is “always listening to voices and providing necessary support to protect human rights of LGBTQ people as members of society,” in a statement.

The Queer Culture Festival was also denied a permit by the Seoul History Museum.

The US Embassy in Seoul will also support the event, as it has in previous years.

“As in past years, embassy representatives will join in Pride events worldwide, including here in the Republic of Korea, to raise awareness of the challenges faced by LGBTQI+ individuals,” the embassy told Reuters in a statement.

AUSTRALIA

SYDNEY, Australia – Cumberland, New South Wales drew international headlines this week after its city council voted 6-5 to ban books on same-sex parenting from local libraries. Four councilors were not present for the May 1 vote.

The motion amends the council’s library strategy to order “That Council take immediate action to rid same sex parents books/materials in Council’s library service.”

The move from the council, which represents around 250,000 people in the western suburbs of Sydney, was swiftly condemned by residents, LGBT leaders, and representatives of the state government.

New South Wales Attorney-General Michael Daley has referred the motion to the state’s Anti-Discrimination Board for advice, while Arts Minister John Graham has warned the council that the new policy directive puts state library funding for the council in jeopardy, as it would breach public library guidelines. He’s asked council to reconsider the ban.

“It’s a terrible message to send, to have this councilor importing this US culture war into our country and playing it out on the shelves of the local library,” Graham said on a morning television show. “I think the community expectations are clear — the local councilor should be coming around to pick up their bin, not telling them what to read.”

Cumberland’s local council is dominated by the relatively LGBT-friendly Australian Labor Party, but the motion from Our Local Government Party Councilor Steve Christou carried with support from Liberal-Party-affiliated Independents and a single vote from a Labor councilor, who has since been condemned by the party.

The move comes just a few months after the same council voted to ban drag queen storytime events at local libraries.

Christou says the motion was inspired after he received complaints from constituents who saw the book Same-Sex Parents by Holly Duhig on display in the children’s section of a library. The book explores what it’s like to have two moms or two dads from a child’s perspective.

During the debate on the motion, Christou alleged that the book “sexualized” children and repeated dog-whistle allegations against queer people and parents.

“We’re going to make it clear tonight that … these kind of books, same-sex parents books, don’t find their way to our kids,” Christou said, according to The Guardian. “Our kids shouldn’t be sexualised.”

Christou said the proposed amendment was “for the protection and safety of our children”.

“Hands off our kids,” he repeated.

Christou has said the amendment was demanded by his community, which he says is a “very religious community,” despite the fact that a petition against the amendment garnered more than 10,000 signatures in 24 hours.

“This community is a very religious community, a very family-orientated community.

“They don’t want such controversial issues going against their beliefs indoctrinated to their libraries. This is not Marrickville or Newtown, this is Cumberland city council.”

The petition was launched by a Cumberland area grandmother to what she describes as a “rainbow family” Caroline Staples. Staples will present her petition to council on May 15. 

Global LGBTQ+ news gathering & reporting by Rob Salerno 

PRETORIA, South Africa — South African LGBTQ+ organizations have welcomed a new law that seeks to combat hate crimes and hate speech.

President Cyril Ramaphosa on May 9 signed the Preventing and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill that had been introduced in 2018.

According to the new law; the direct or indirect unfair discrimination against anyone on the grounds of age, albinism, culture, disability, ethnic or social origin, gender, HIV status, language, nationality, migrant, refugee status, asylum seekers, occupation, trade, political affiliation, conviction, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, sex characteristics or skin color is a criminal offense punishable by a fine or up to eight years in prison.

“A hate crime is committed if a person commits any recognized offense under any law that is motivated by prejudice or intolerance based on one or more characteristics or perceived characteristics of the victim, as listed in the legislation or a family member of the victim,” said the president’s office. “The law also makes it an offense when speech material is intentionally distributed or made available in electronic communication, and the said person knows that such electronic communication constitutes hate speech.”

Crimen injuria, the unlawful and intentional impairing of dignity or privacy of another person under common law, was in place before the new law. Crimen injuria, which to extent protected some forms of hate against the LGBTQ+ community, is still active.

The Preventing and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill, however, is more comprehensive in the sense that it particularly focuses on hate speech and hate crimes, and therefore makes it easier to seek legal recourse than under crimen injuria.

“As Out, we commend President Cyril Ramaphosa on the move that he has made in making sure that the rights of LGBTQ+ persons are protected. We, as Out, also hope that other African countries can learn from this historic milestone that all people are equal and that their rights should be protected,” said Out LGBT South Rights Human Rights Coordinator Sibonelo Ncanana. 

Ncanana specifically applauded Deputy Justice and Constitutional Development Minister John Jeffrey and the working group that helped secure the bill’s passage.

“We hope that all government departments will enforce the mandate of the act,” said Ncanana. “We also hope that it will help in decreasing the amount of hate crimes that are happening in South Africa, create safer communities, and that LGBTQ+ people will find themselves safe.”

Ruth Maseko of Umndeni LGBTI Group and the Triangle Project said the new law creates a precedent of what constitutes hate crime and the repercussions.

“We are delighted at the passing of the bill after so many years, as it creates a legal definition of hate crimes,” said Maseko. “This now puts in place mechanisms for authorities to collect and report details about these incidents of hate for the effective monitoring, analysis of trends, and appropriate interventions that are needed.”

Maseko added that although the new law will aid in giving the courts a framework to work in when handling cases of hate, it will not really deter people from committing those crimes.

“The new law will provide quantitative and qualitative data as currently we have no way of telling how many of these crimes are committed. The only way we know, is when they are reported to a civil society organization or are reported in the media,” said Maseko.

“Although it will do nothing to change the attitudes of people who act out in these ways, the law does send out a message that hate crimes will not be tolerated in South Africa and will provide additional tools to investigators and prosecutors to hold perpetrators accountable for their actions,” added Maseko.

The law, however, does not consider actions undertaken in good faith as part of hate speech. They include artistic creativity, performance or other form of expression, academic or scientific inquiry fair, and accurate reporting or commentary in the public interest. 

It also excludes interpretation and articulating or espousing of any religious conviction, tenet, belief, teaching, doctrine or writing that does not advocate hatred or constitutes incitement to cause harm. The law also contains directives on training and other measures to be undertaken by the South African Police Service and the National Prosecuting Authority to ensure effective processing of the newly defined crimes. 

By Tess Vrbin | LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – The Arkansas State Library Board on Friday voted down two motions to withhold state funding from public libraries that board member Jason Rapert put forth in his ongoing opposition to the presence of certain books on library shelves.

The former Republican state senator from Conway reintroduced a motion he proposed at February’s board meeting to suspend funding for libraries suing the state until the litigation is concluded. The proposal died for lack of a second in February. On Friday, the other six members of the board voted against the motion while Rapert was the only one to vote for it.

Rapert also moved to withhold funds for “any library that allows unrestricted access to books or materials that contain sexually explicit, obscene or pornographic materials to minors,” based on the results of a survey he requested in February. The motion failed with the same results.

State Library Director Jennifer Chilcoat circulated Rapert’s request to find out whether a list of books he considers inappropriate for minors are available on library shelves statewide, and Rapert said the survey revealed the presence of 352 “objectionable” books. He did not say how many of the state’s dozens of library systems responded or did not respond to the survey.

The board does not “have any way to determine which libraries might be knowingly making obscene materials available for children,” board Chairwoman Deborah Knox of Mountain Home said.

“I’m having a hard time believing that any of our public libraries are doing that, and I would hate to approve a motion inhibiting distribution of funds to those libraries when we have no way of knowing if those libraries even exist,” Knox said.

Rapert said the survey results prove otherwise.

“You can claim all this stuff, going around and around in circles, acting like you don’t know that there’s explicit material teaching kids how to give oral sex to each other,” he said, raising his voice. “I hope every community in the state watches this [meeting]. I am appalled that any adult would try to stop us from taking a stand against this junk on library shelves.”

Both of Rapert’s motions would have applied to distributions of funding at future board meetings, since they were introduced after the board voted to give public libraries their allotted share of state money for the final quarter of fiscal year 2024. Rapert was the only member to vote against the disbursement.

Shari Bales of Hot Springs, who was confirmed to the board by the state Senate along with Rapert in December, asked who is responsible for determining whether a book’s content is sexually explicit or pornographic. Rapert responded by amending his motion to specify “sexually explicit, obscene or pornographic materials… as described in Act 372.”

The 2023 law in question would alter Arkansas libraries’ processes for reconsidering material and create criminal liability for librarians who distribute content that some consider “obscene” or “harmful to minors.” The law mentions the word “obscene” several times but does not define it, and it does not include “sexually explicit” or “pornographic” in the text at all.

The law’s first section does include the phrase “furnishing a harmful item to a minor,” defining “item” as “a material or performance that depicts or describes nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or sadomasochistic abuse.”

A federal judge temporarily blocked two portions of Act 372, including the first section, in July before it went into effect. U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks wrote in his preliminary injunction order that the two sections could lead to arbitrary interpretation and “content-based restrictions” that violate the First Amendment. The case is scheduled for trial in October.

The Central Arkansas Library System (CALS), the Fayetteville Public Library and the Eureka Springs Carnegie Public Library are among the 19 plaintiffs challenging the law.

Rapert’s amended motion died for lack of a second before the original motion failed.

Over the last few years, hard-right conservatives in Arkansas have tried to tie library funding to whether certain books are available on shelves. In November 2022, a narrowly-approved ballot measure cut Craighead County libraries’ funding in half after protests over an LGBTQ+ book display and a transgender author’s visit to the library.

Republican state Sen. Dan Sullivan of Jonesboro, the seat of Craighead County, was the primary sponsor of Act 372 in the Legislature. In October, he said the state should withhold funding from the Arkansas Library Association (ArLA), a nonprofit trade association that does not receive state funding.

Many local Arkansas libraries are ArLA members, and the organization is among the plaintiffs challenging Act 372.

Board discussion

Bales said she thought Rapert’s motion about explicit content “sounds a lot like legislation” and was outside the board’s purview. She emphasized that her opposition to the motion did not mean she wanted her children to read “dirty books.”

“I think we should err on the side of staying in our lane and wearing the hats that have been assigned to us,” she said. “…It may be a really good idea, but sometimes really good ideas are not always really good policies.”

Bales also repeated her concerns from February about Rapert’s proposal to withhold funding for libraries suing the state. Rapert argued again that a state entity should not provide money to plaintiffs that could use it to pay their attorneys. Bales said the plaintiffs might be using private funds for this purpose, which would make withholding public funds “a moot point” and possibly “coercion.”

Rapert said it was an “exaggeration” that his proposal might be coercive to the entities that the board funds. He also said the state Legislature can dissolve state boards that do not “do their jobs.”

“We’re the ones that decide how the money is disbursed, and if you don’t understand that… maybe you need to revisit what you’re on the board for,” he said.

Rapert asked Chilcoat to place an item on the agenda for the board’s next meeting in August to “assess and handle” the presence of “pornographic” books in libraries. He did not name any of the books in question, which he did in February, but he mentioned a book with an incest scene that “shocked” him.

Board member Lupe Peña de Martinez of Mabelvale said she recently read six of the books Rapert opposes, including the one with the scene he mentioned. She said her 13-year-old child is not currently allowed to read the books but will someday be mature enough to read them.

Books that depict sexual abuse of children by adults, including incest, are intended as resources for children who have experienced this, Peña de Martinez said, and making these books unavailable to minors across the board “is exercising the privilege of a much more comfortable life.”

“I am repulsed by what’s in those books, but not because I’m upset with the authors,” she said. “I’m repulsed at what children are victim to… If we read the books cover to cover, it’s not about exposing children to lewd content. It’s about saying, ‘This is not right, and there are adults who love you and want to protect you.’”

Peña de Martinez’s comments received applause from the librarians in the audience.

Rapert acknowledged that these issues are real but said some books “are actually grooming children, and that is another problem.”

******************************************************************************************

Tess Vrbin came to the Advocate from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, where she reported on low-income housing and tenants’ rights, and won awards for her coverage of 2021 flooding and tornado damage in rural Arkansas. She previously covered local government for The Commercial Dispatch in Mississippi and state government for the Columbia Daily Tribune in Missouri.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was previously published by the Arkansas Advocate and is republished with permission.

The Arkansas Advocate is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization dedicated to tough, fair daily reporting and investigative journalism that holds public officials accountable and focuses on the relationship between the lives of Arkansans and public policy. This service is free to readers and other news outlets.

We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST – DONATE!