Connect with us

National

Law firm’s investigation of HRC head seen as conflict of interest

A Human Rights Campaign representative responded with a series of bullet points essentially denying any conflict of interest

Published

on

Alphonso David at 2019 HRC National Dinner (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

WASHINGTON – After a damning report on sexual misconduct allegations that forced Andrew Cuomo to resign as governor of New York and that ensnared the Human Rights Campaign president for having a potential role in the cover-up, the nation’s leading LGBTQ group has arranged for a law firm to conduct an independent review of its president’s role in the scandal — but legal experts see a conflict of interest looming over the process.

Sidley Austin LLP, the law firm chosen to conduct the review, has a self-described “long standing pro-bono relationship” with the Human Rights Campaign and was chief among its legal partners announced in October 2019 for a new direction to litigation in LGBTQ advocacy, which was an engagement Alphonso David undertook when he took the helm as HRC’s president.

In fact, Sidley issued a news statement hailing its participation in the agreement with the Human Rights Campaign and six other law firms, which Sidley described as an “alliance” designed to “help shape state and federal laws, regulations and policies and the application of constitutional principles.”

“We’re looking forward to working with the Human Rights Campaign on strategic litigation that will take on discriminatory measures targeting LGBTQ people,” Carter Phillips, partner at Sidley, is quoted as saying in the statement. “HRC is a long-standing pro bono client and this next stage of collaboration reinforces Sidley’s deep commitment to advocating for diversity and equality.”

As a result of the 2019 announcement, which was brokered soon after David took the helm of the Human Rights Campaign, some legal experts see a conflict of interest that undermines the perception of impartiality in Sidley’s ongoing review and could color any finding of no wrongdoing, which would arguably be in the interests of all parties involved in the review.

Brenner Fissell, a law professor who teaches legal ethics at Hofstra University in Long Island, N.Y., told the Blade the independent review Sidley is undertaking “appears less than credible.”

“This is not even a relationship where they engaged them once,” Fissell said. “Sidley in the press release calls HRC a long-standing pro bono client, and they’re also doing PR for them. I mean, they’re really inextricably connected, right?”

The scandal with the Human Rights Campaign president began when New York Attorney General Letitia James issued her report finding Cuomo violated the law by sexually harassing as many as 11 women on the job. David, who before taking over as Human Rights Campaign president was counselor to the governor of New York, was named nearly a dozen times in the report.

David has continued to deny wrongdoing. However, the findings indicate after his tenure as counselor to Cuomo, he kept the personnel file of an employee accusing the governor of sexual misconduct, then assisted in returning that file to Cuomo staffers seeking to leak it to the media in an attempt to discredit her. (A representative has disputed the characterization of material David kept as a personnel file, saying it was memorandum on an internal employment matter David kept because he, in part, worked on it.)

Further, the report finds David allegedly said he would help find individuals to sign their names to a draft op-ed that sought to discredit the survivor but went unpublished, although he wouldn’t sign the document himself. Also, the report indicates David was involved in the discussions about secretly calling and recording a call between a former staffer and another survivor in a separate effort to smear her.

In response, David said he agreed to help with only one version of the letter that was more positive in nature and his part of the discussion about recording a survivor was limited to his role as counselor.

Although the Human Rights Campaign board has stood by David and announced on the day after the report came out it has renewed his contract for another five years, last week it announced an independent investigation to resolve the matter. The investigation would be conducted by Sidley and last no longer than 30 days. David has publicly endorsed the review.

But the pre-existing close relationship between Sidley and the Human Rights Campaign has left some legal observers questioning the merits of the investigation.

Fissell said no ethical rules are in place for conducting independent investigations per se, especially because Sidley has never represented David before as a client. As a result, Fissell said there is likely no technical violation of ethics rules over conflict of interest in this scenario.

The only real framework for independent investigations that could be a model of the review for this situation, Fissell said, is found in the handbook for the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission. Among the factors considered in such investigations, Fissell said, is whether outside counsel conducting the review had previously done work for a company or if management previously engaged such counsel.

“If you had previously engaged such counsel, that makes it less independent,” Fissell said. “So the answer to your question is, this is not good if you want to do a truly independent investigation.”

Fissell also questioned why 30 days was selected as the time limit for the investigation, which he said seems artificial and could limit findings.

Sidley didn’t respond to repeated email requests from the Blade for answers to a series of written questions on the independent investigation and its pre-existing relationship with the Human Rights Campaign, including whether or not Phillips, the attorney quoted in the news statement would participate in the ongoing review.

A Human Rights Campaign representative, however, responded to similar inquiries from the Blade with a series of bullet points essentially denying any conflict of interest and standing by the decision to charge Sidley with the investigation.

The representative in the bullet points said the Human Rights Campaign chose Sidley “because of its vast experience in internal investigations and reviews” and is “grateful that Sidley has always represented us on a pro bono basis, including in this matter.”

“Sidley has not represented HRC on any matter related to any of the issues in the current internal investigation that Sidley is conducting,” the representative said.

The Human Rights Campaign representative said Sidley is one of many firms that has worked for the LGBTQ organization, but has “never represented Alphonso David on any matter.” In conducting the investigation, the representative said Sidley reports to an independent Board of Directors for the Human Rights Campaign.

Michael Frisch, an ethics counsel and adjunct professor at Georgetown Law School, told the Blade a law firm being charged with conducting an investigation for an entity after having a previous relationship with it is “always potentially a problem.”

“When any outside entity is retained to conduct an independent review, it has to be truly independent,” Frisch said. “To me, if you’re going to conduct an independent inquiry. Your bonafides to give independent advice in a report is always subject of concern, and one should be above reproach in those situations.”

Frisch, asked if the potential for a conflict is present in Sidley’s investigation of the Human Rights Campaign president, said he couldn’t directly opine on that without knowing all the details about the situation.

“You analyze any conflict of interest from the point of view of is there a substantial risk that the lawyers’ advice will be colored by some interest, other than the client who’s getting the advice,” Frisch said. “The magic language in the rule is substantial risk of material limitation, that’s essentially the test. Every client is entitled to independent advice.”

Asked if a law firm like Sidley could take any internal steps to mitigate the appearance of conflict of interest while continuing to conduct an independent investigation, Frisch said those options, such as walls or ethical screens, aren’t in play here.

“Those kinds of mechanisms to defeat conflicts don’t sound like they’re applicable in this kind of situation because it doesn’t really sound like client-client conflicts,” Frisch said. “A report is not like litigation in that there are parties and opposing counsel and things of that nature that you would have obligations to.”

Frisch concluded: “So that’s where I kind of get back to the key is is it a truly independent report, and if the drafters of the report are compromised by other interests, that always leaves the report open to criticism on that basis.”

A representative for David, who previously pushed back on conclusions of wrongdoing by David based on the report, didn’t respond to a request for comment for this article. Meanwhile, David’s mention in the AG report continues to leave the nation’s leading LGBTQ group in turmoil. Amid reports staffers have called on David to resign, lesbian tennis legend Martina Navratilova — who has previously come under fire for views against transgender women in sports — publicly called for David’s resignation in a podcast interview with the progressive news outlet Raw Story.

Last week, David posted to his Twitter account an open letter from “colleagues and friends” in support of him. Days later, the Blade was forwarded an open letter from “Real HRC Staffers” addressing a separate “communication” that went out from other employees calling for David’s resignation. The open letter asserts David is being unfairly maligned and calls for signatures in support of his presidency.

“It is disheartening to see how the leadership of a Black queer man is being criticized by and vilified in the media and within our own organization at a time of racial reckoning in America and globally,” the letter said. “Worse, is to witness the scapegoating of Alphonso and others who are now being made to answer for the behaviors of powerful white men.”

Fissell, meanwhile, told the Blade the Human Rights Campaign would be better suited going elsewhere for a law firm to conduct the investigation if it wanted real answers about its president in the Cuomo affair.

“If they’re truly committed to demonstrating that they want to have an independent investigation, they would find someone else,” Fissell said.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Advocacy groups mark Banned Books Week

‘Book bans have no place in our democracy’

Published

on

"All Boys Aren't Blue" and "Gender Queer" (Photos via Amazon)

People across the country from Sept. 22-28 are observing Banned Books Week, which has taken on added significance amid a surge of censorship efforts.

Banned Books Week, organized by PFLAG and a coalition of other advocacy groups, literary organizations, and educational institutions, seeks to raise awareness about efforts to remove content from public libraries, schools, and bookstores.

The current wave of book bans, which began intensifying in 2021, is driven primarily by conservative groups who disproportionately target titles featuring the voices and experiences of LGBTQ people and people of color.

“This is part of an organized effort to divide our communities by stoking fears against LGBTQ+ people, Black people, and immigrants,” PFLAG Vice President of Advocacy Katie Blair said. “[It] is targeted not only to banning books and censoring schools, but to infiltrating the lives of LGBTQ+ people and those who love them.”

While LGBTQ books have always been a target of book bans, censorship efforts in recent years are more focused on restricting access to LGBTQ content than in the past.

The Washington Post reports “LGBTQ books were the targets of between less than 1 and 3 percent of book challenges filed in schools” from the 2000s to the early 2010s. In 2022, however, 45.5 percent of unique titles that were challenged were written by or about LGBTQ people.

“Book bans have no place in our democracy,” the Congressional Equality Caucus said in a post to its X account.

On the American Library Association’s 2023 list of the 10 most challenged books, seven books featured LGBTQ voices; with Maia Kobabe’s “Gender Queer,” George M. Johnson’s “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” and Juno Dawson’s “This Book is Gay” topping the list.

The consequences of restricting access to LGBTQ stories and voices are far reaching especially for young people, Blair said.

“These bans contribute to the erasure of our communities and our histories, and all our stories deserve to be told. We believe that all students deserve the freedom to learn. They deserve to be able to develop their critical thinking skills, to be in schools that are open and affirming,” she said.

Deborah Caldwell-Stone, the director of the ALA’s Office of Intellectual Freedom, said another difference in the current wave of censorship is that most calls to censor books in school libraries and public libraries are now driven by organized advocacy groups.

She explained that in the past, most book challenges were initiated by parents and guardians who were concerned about a particular book their child was reading and brought those concerns to a teacher or librarian.

“But now we’re seeing organized groups or their spokespersons showing up at board meetings demanding the censorship of sometimes hundreds of titles all at once. And we’re seeing state legislatures pass laws that are intended to remove hundreds of books, if not thousands of books, all at once, from library shelves,” she said.

Between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31, 2024, ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 1,128 unique titles targeted for censorship. While this number marks a decline from the 1,915 titles challenged during the same period in 2023, it remains far higher than pre-2020 levels, when challenges hovered between 200 and 300 unique titles annually.

Moreover, PEN America, which tracks the total number of book bans rather than unique titles, counted more than 10,000 books that were banned in public schools during the 2023-2024 school year, nearly triple the amount from the previous year. Both ALA and PEN America’s reports exclude instances of soft censorship, where libraries and organizations preemptively avoid purchasing certain books or restrict access due to fear of potential challenges.

According to PEN America, around 8,000 books were banned in Florida and Iowa alone. Both states passed laws in recent years restricting access to books in schools that depict or describe sex. The vague language of the laws has drawn criticism for exacerbating soft censorship, and has often been interpreted to ban books with discussions of gender and LGBTQ identities.

Vera Eidelman, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said, it is “not clear what [the language] means, and that is a problem in and of itself, because if teachers and librarians and other educators face discipline for violating that law, and they don’t know what the law means, that’s a due process problem.”

She noted that the laws have been and are being challenged on grounds of vagueness, and for violating the First Amendment.

Banned Books Week, which library activist Judith Krug founded in 1982, will culminate in “Let Freedom Read Day” on Saturday, on which organizers urge people to take at least one action to defend the freedom to read, such as participating in this year’s elections.

Caldwell-Stone emphasized the importance of being engaged at all levels of government.

“This is an intensely local issue,” she said. “While we are seeing state legislation intended to engage in broad censorship across the state, primarily these decisions are made at the local level.”

Banned Books Week recommends engaging with school and library administrators, school board and library board members, city councilpersons, and elected representatives at meetings to voice support for access to books. People are also encouraged to attend town halls or rallies to demonstrate opposition to book bans, purchase banned books, and volunteer at local libraries.

Throughout the week, filmmaker Ava DuVernay and student activist Julia Garnett, the honorary chairs of this year’s Banned Books Week, are discussing the various ways people can stand up against censorship attempts in virtual events accessible through the Banned Books Week website.

Libraries in D.C. and across the nation, meanwhile, are hosting readings, art exhibitions, and other activities to educate families about the freedom to read.

The Anne Arundel County Public Library system on Wednesday held an event to celebrate its launch as a “book sanctuary,” designating its libraries as “safe havens where the freedom to read is fiercely protected.”

Caldwell-Stone recommends those who are interested in countering up to censorship efforts view the action toolkit available at www.uniteagainstbookbans.org and the ALA’s “Reader. Voter. Ready.” guide at www.ala.org.

Continue Reading

White House

Biden-Harris administration sets record for number of confirmed LGBTQ judges

Mary Kay Costello Senate confirmation took place Tuesday

Published

on

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Senate voted 52-41 on Tuesday to confirm Mary Kay Costello as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, thereby setting a record for the number of LGBTQ federal judicial appointments made under the Biden-Harris administration, 12.

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights says less than three percent of the country’s nearly 900 federal judges are LGBTQ. Until this week, the Obama-Biden administration had appointed the most, 11, over two terms.

Costello is a prosecutor who has served as assistant U.S. attorney in Philadelphia since 2008.

In a post on X, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee’s Democratic majority wrote that she “exhibits a breadth of experience and a strong dedication to public service” and is “ready to serve as a federal judge.”

U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), the Democratic majority whip and chair of the committee, shared another post on X celebrating the administration’s record-breaking number of LGBTQ judicial appointments, writing, “We’re diversifying the federal judiciary for generations to come.”

Continue Reading

National

Leaders of terrorist group targeted ‘Black, immigrant, LGBT, Jewish people’

FBI arrests two leaders of ‘Terrogram Collective’

Published

on

The FBI and Justice Department arrested two men in connection with a terror plot targeting LGBT people, among others. (Photo by BILLPERRY/Bigstock)

In a little-noticed development, the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice announced on Sept. 9 that federal prosecutors obtained indictments against two leaders of a U.S.-based terrorist group that allegedly was arranging for the murder of federal government officials and soliciting others to commit hate crimes against “Black, immigrant, LGBT, and Jewish people.”

The Sept. 9 announcement says Dallas Humber, 34, of Elk Grove, Calif., and Matthew Allison, 37, of Boise, Idaho, who are leaders of the Terrorgram Collective, a transnational terrorist organization, were charged in a 15-count indictment for “soliciting hate crimes, soliciting the murder of federal officials, and conspiring to provide material support for terrorists.”

It says the two men were arrested on Sept. 6, but it does not say where they were at the time of their arrest.

“Today’s indictment charges the defendants with leading a transnational terrorist group dedicated to attacking America’s critical infrastructure, targeting a hit list of our country’s public officials, and carrying out deadly hate crimes – all in the name of violent white supremacist ideology,” U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in the announcement.

“This indictment charges the leaders of a transnational terrorist group with several civil rights violations, including soliciting others to engage in hate crimes and terrorist attacks against Black, immigrant, LGBT, and Jewish people,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Kristen Clarke said in the announcement. “Make no mistake, as hate groups turn to online platforms, the federal government is adapting and responding to protect vulnerable communities,” Clarke said.

U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California, Phillip A. Talbert, one of the prosecutors in the case, added in the announcement, “The defendants solicited murders and hate crimes based on the race, religions, national origin, sexual orientation, and gender identity of others…My office will continue to work tirelessly with our partners in law enforcement and in the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute those who commit such violations of federal criminal law.”

The announcement also says federal investigators determined Hunter and Alison helped to develop a “hit list” of targets for terrorist attacks and hate crimes that included “U.S. federal, state, and local officials, as well as leaders of private companies and non-government organizations, many of whom were targeted because of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”

Continue Reading

White House

The Los Angeles Blade interviews President Joe Biden

Oval Office sit-down was the first for an LGBTQ newspaper

Published

on

President Joe Biden and Christopher Kane in the Oval Office on Sept. 12, 2024 (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Writing about President Joe Biden’s legacy is difficult without the distance and time required to assess a leader of his stature, but what becomes clear from talking with him is the extent to which his views on LGBTQ rights come from the heart.

Biden leads an administration that has been hailed as the most pro-LGBTQ in American history, achieving major milestones in the struggle to expand freedoms and protections for the community.

Meanwhile, conservative elected officials at the local, state, and national levels have led an all-out assault against LGBTQ Americans — especially those who are transgender, and especially transgender youth, who face an uncertain future with Donald Trump promising to strip them of their rights and reverse the gains of the past four years if he is elected in November.

Biden shared his thoughts and reflections on these subjects and more in a wide-ranging sit-down interview with the Washington Blade on Sept. 12 in the Oval Office, which marked the first time in which an LGBTQ newspaper has conducted an exclusive interview with a sitting U.S. president.

Looking back on the movement, the president repeatedly expressed his admiration for the “men and women who broke the back of the prejudice, or began to break the back” starting with those involved in the nascent movement for gay rights that was kicked off in earnest with the 1969 Stonewall Riots.

They “took their lives in their own hands,” Biden said. “Not a joke. It took enormous courage, enormous courage, and that’s why I’ve spent some time also trying to memorialize that,” first as vice president in 2016 when President Barack Obama designated a new national monument at the site of the historic uprising, and again this summer when speaking at the opening ceremony of the Stonewall National Monument Visitor Center.

“I think it set an example,” Biden said, not just in the U.S. but around the world.

Stonewall “became the site of a call for freedom and for dignity and for equality,” he said, and at a time when, “imagine — if you spoke up, you’d be fired, or you get the hell beat out of you.”

The president continued, “I was really impressed when I went to Stonewall. And I was really impressed talking to the guys who stood up at the time. I think the thing that gets underestimated is the physical and moral courage of the community, the people who broke through, who said ‘enough, enough,’ and they risked their lives. Some lost their lives along the way.”

Through to today, Biden said, “most of the openly gay people that have worked with me, that I’ve worked with, the one advantage they have is they tend to have more courage than most people have.”

“No, I’m serious,” he added, “I think you guys underestimate that.”

The president has spoken publicly about his deep respect and admiration for LGBTQ people, including the trans community, and trans youth, whom he has repeatedly said are some of the bravest people he knows.

A record-breaking number of LGBTQ officials are serving in appointed positions throughout the Biden-Harris administration. Among them are Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the first openly gay Senate-confirmed Cabinet member; Rachel Levine, the highest-ranking transgender appointee in history, who serves as assistant secretary for health at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; the first out White House communications director and press secretary, Ben LaBolt and Karine Jean-Pierre; and 11 federal judges (the same number of LGBTQ judicial nominees who were confirmed during the Obama-Biden administration’s two terms).

Even though “everyone was nervous,” Biden said, “I wanted an administration that looked like America,” adding, “all the LGBTQ+ people that have worked for me or with me have reinforced my view that it’s not what your sexual preference is, it’s what your intellectual capacity is and what your courage is.”

“I never sat down and said, ‘it’s going to be hard, man, she’s gay, or he’s gay,’ or ‘she’s a lesbian’” he said, and likewise, “it wasn’t like the people I work with, I went, ‘God, I’m surprised they’re competent as anybody else.'”

And then there is Sarah McBride, the Delaware state senator who is favored to win her congressional race in November, which would make her the first transgender U.S. member of Congress, a sign that “we’re on the right track,” Biden said.

A close friend of the Biden family, McBride worked for the president’s eldest son, Beau, who died from cancer in 2015. (As the Blade reported on Friday, Biden called to congratulate her on winning the Democratic primary race last week.)

While the president’s close personal and professional relationships with LGBTQ friends and aides has often been highlighted in the context of Biden’s leadership on efforts to expand freedoms and protections for the community, he credits first and foremost the values he learned from his father.

“I think my attitude about this, from the very beginning, was shaped by my dad,” Biden said. “You think I’m exaggerating, but my dad was a well-read guy who got admitted to college just before the war started” and in addition to being well educated was “a decent, decent, decent, honorable man.”

“My dad used to say that everyone’s entitled to be treated with dignity,” the president said, recalling a story he has shared before about a time when, as a teenager, he was surprised by the sight of two men kissing in downtown Wilmington, Del., and his father responded, “Joey, it’s simple. They love each other.”

“As a consequence of that, most of the things that I’ve done have related to just [what] I think is basic fairness and basic decency,” Biden said.

In his 2017 memoir, “Promise Me, Dad,” Biden writes that the country was too slow to understand “the simple and obvious truth” that LGBTQ people are “overwhelmingly good, decent, honorable people who want and deserve the same rights as anyone else.”

Plus, “It’s not like someone wakes up one morning says, ‘you know, I want to be transgender,’ that’s what I want to do,” he said. “What do they think people wake up, decide one morning, ‘that’s what I wanted’ — it’s a lot easier being gay, right?”

As vice president, Biden had pushed for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and for the designation of a national monument to honor Stonewall, but he took a lot of heat — along with a lot of praise from the LGBTQ community — for voicing his support for same-sex marriage before Obama had fully come around to embracing that position.

His remarks came in the heat of the 2012 reelection campaign during an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press.” Biden told the Blade he had just “visited two guys who had children” and “if you saw these two kids with their fathers, you’d walk away saying, ‘wait a minute, they’re good parents.’”

At the event, a reception hosted by Michael Lombardo, an HBO executive, and Sonny Ward, an architect, Biden pointed to the children and said, “Things are changing so rapidly, it’s going to become a political liability in the near term for someone to say, ‘I oppose gay marriage.’”

Nevertheless, “I remember how everyone was really upset, except the president,” Biden said, when he told David Gregory, “I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men and women marrying women and heterosexual men and women marrying men and women are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties and, quite frankly, I don’t see much of a distinction beyond that.”

It was a watershed moment. Obama would pledge his support for marriage equality three days later. And 10 years later, as president, Biden would sign the Respect for Marriage Act, a landmark bill codifying legal protections for married same-sex and interracial couples, rights that conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has expressed an interest in revisiting.

The president glanced at a print-out with bullet points, presumably a list of the various ways in which he and his administration have advanced LGBTQ rights over the past four years. “I forgot half the stuff I had done,” he said. “But you know, I’m just really proud of a lot of things we did.”

Ticking through some highlights, Biden started with the Respect for Marriage Act. “I was very proud” to sign the legislation, he said, with a ceremony in December 2022 that included Vice President Kamala Harris, first lady Jill Biden, and second gentleman Doug Emhoff.

Biden pointed to several advancements in health equity, such as the FDA’s decision to change “the law so that you could no longer discriminate against using the blood of a gay man or a gay woman,” progress in the national strategy to end HIV by 2030, an initiative coordinated by HHS, and a push to expand access to prophylactic drug regimens to protect against the transmission of HIV.

He added, “I directed the administration to promote human rights for LGBTQ [people] everywhere, particularly, for example, Uganda — they want help from us; they’ve got to change their policy, in terms of the discrimination.”

President Yoweri Museveni in May 2023 signed a law that carries a death penalty provision for “aggravated homosexuality.” The U.S. subsequently imposed visa restrictions on Ugandan officials and removed the country from a program that allows sub-Saharan African countries to trade duty-free with the U.S. The World Bank Group also announced the suspension of new loans to Uganda.

Several of the administration’s pro-LGBTQ accomplishments and ongoing work address Republican-led efforts to restrict rights and freedoms. For instance, the president noted the importance of protecting in-vitro fertilization treatments, which are threatened by Trump “and his buddies” who were involved in Project 2025, the 900+ page governing blueprint that was drafted in anticipation of the former president’s return to the White House. The document contains extreme restrictions on reproductive healthcare and provisions that would strip away LGBTQ-inclusive non-discrimination rules.

“Fighting book bans” is another example, Biden said, adding, “I mean, come on, these guys want to erase history instead of make history.”

Last year, the president appointed an official to serve in the Education Department for purposes of advising schools on instances where their restrictions on reading material, which have been shown to disproportionately target content with LGBTQ characters or themes, may run afoul of federal civil rights law.

Before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed, Biden said, “I spoke up when they were dismissing people, discharging people in the military because they were gay.” In 2021, just a few days after his inauguration, the president issued an executive order reversing the Trump administration’s ban on military service by transgender service members.

Lowering his voice for emphasis, Biden added, “They can shoot straight. They can shoot just as straight as anybody else.”

Other major pro-LGBTQ moves by the Biden-Harris administration include:

  • • Issuance of a new Title IX policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools, educational activities, and programs;
  • • A proposed rule from HHS that would protect LGBTQ youth in foster care;
  • • Expansion of mental health services, including the establishment of a 988 suicide and crisis lifeline, which provides the option for callers to be connected with LGBTQ-trained counselors;.
  • • Legal challenges of anti-trans state laws, such as those restricting access to health treatments;
  • • Repeated pushback against these bills by the president and other officials like Jean-Pierre;
  • • The president’s remarks reaffirming his support for the LGBTQ community, including in all of his State of the Union addresses;
  • • The administration’s work tackling the mpox outbreak;
  • • Expanded non-discrimination protections in the healthcare space;
  • • Issuance of new guidelines allowing for changes to gender markers on official government-issued IDs;
  • • Efforts to bring justice to veterans who were discharged other than honorably under discriminatory military policies, and;
  • • ‘The biggest Pride month celebrations ever held at the White House.

“But the one thing I didn’t get done was the Equality Act,” Biden said, “which is important. important.”

The president and his administration pushed hard for Congress to pass the legislation, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination protections in areas from housing and employment to lending and jury service.

Biden raised the issue again when the conversation turned to his plans to stay involved after January 2025. “Look,” he said, “when a person can get married” to a spouse of the same sex but might “show up at a restaurant and get thrown out of the restaurant because they’re LGBTQ, that’s wrong.”

“That’s why we need the Equality Act,” Biden said. “We need to pass it. So, I’m going to be doing everything I can to be part of the outside voices, and I hope my foundations that I will be setting back up will talk about equality across the board.”

“Lawmakers, aides, and advocates say that significant obstacles to progress on the Equality Act remain, including polarized views on how to protect the rights of religious institutions that condemn homosexuality and Republicans’ increasing reliance on transgender rights as a wedge issue,” the Washington Post wrote in 2021, after the bill was passed by the House but left to languish in the Senate.

On LGBTQ issues more broadly, Biden said, “I think there are a lot of really good Republicans that I’ve served with, especially in the Senate, who don’t have a prejudiced bone in their body about this but are intimidated.”

“Because if you take a position, especially in the MAGA Republican Party now, you’re going to be — they’re going to go after you,” he added. “Trump is a different breed of cat. I mean, I don’t want to make this political, but everything he’s done has been anti, anti-LGBTQ, I mean, across the board.”

Project 2025, the president said, “is just full of nothing but disdain for the LGBTQ community. And you have Clarence Thomas talking about, when the decision was made [to overturn] Roe v Wade, that maybe we should consider changing the right of gays to marry — I mean, things that are just off the wall — just pure, simple, prejudice.”

“What I do worry about is I do worry about violence,” Biden said. “I do worry about intimidation. I do worry about what the MAGA right will continue to try to do, but I’m going to stay involved.”

“I’m going to remain involved in all the civil liberties issues that I have worked for my whole life.”

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Gender Liberation March participants rally for bodily autonomy outside Supreme Court, Heritage Foundation

‘Our bodies, our genders, our choices, our futures’

Published

on

The Gender Liberation March took place in D.C. on Sept. 14, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Erkki Forster)

Upwards of 1,000 people gathered in D.C. on Saturday for the first-ever Gender Liberation March, rallying for bodily autonomy and self-determination outside the U.S. Supreme Court and the Heritage Foundation headquarters. 

The march brought together advocates for transgender, LGBTQ, feminist, and reproductive rights, uniting the movements to protest attacks on healthcare access and individual freedoms.

The event kicked off just after noon at Columbus Circle, outside Union Station, where organizers had set up a stage. Throughout the day, speakers such as Elliot Page, Miss Major, and Julio Torres shared personal stories and highlighted the intersectional challenges of trans rights, abortion rights, and LGBTQ rights. Raquel Willis, a core organizer of the event, outlined the broad coalition of communities represented in the Gender Liberation March. 

“This march is for the queers, and the trans folks of any age. It’s for the childless cat ladies and babies and gentlemen and gentlethem. It’s for the migrants and our disabled family. It’s for intersex folks and those living and thriving with HIV. It’s for Muslims and folks of every faith. It’s for those who believe in a free Palestine. It’s for our sex workers. It’s for our incarcerated and detained. It’s for all of us who believe there is a better way to live and love than we are today,” she told the crowd. 

Nick Lloyd, an abortion storyteller from the organization We Testify, underlined the interconnectedness of the movements by sharing his experience as a trans man who had an abortion and discussing the support he received from trans women, emphasizing the significance of “radical solidarity.”

“When we fight for liberation, we need to make sure we are fighting for liberation for all of us,” he said in his speech. 

The Gender Liberation March is organized by a collective of gender justice-based groups, including organizers behind the Women’s Marches and the Brooklyn Liberation Marches. Rachel Carmona, the executive director of the Women’s March, also addressed the importance of solidarity across movements.

She acknowledged that some within the feminist movement have questioned the inclusion of trans issues but countered this view.

“The women’s movement necessarily includes trans people,” Carmona asserted.

The march organized buses from nine East Coast cities, and many attendees arrived in D.C. in the days prior. Chris Silva and Samy Nemir Olivares left New York early that morning to make sure they could participate.

“I actually heard [about the march] from my dear friend, Samy, two weeks ago, and I got energized by the idea, and we woke up really early today to take a 5 a.m. bus and make it here this morning,” Silva said. 

At 1 p.m. the crowd began marching toward the Supreme Court on a route that also passed by the Capitol. Marchers held signs and banners proclaiming “You can’t legislate us out of existence,” and “Our bodies, our futures.”

The Supreme Court has eroded individual liberties with recent decisions such as the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and is set to hear U.S. v. Skrmetti, a case with wide-reaching implications for trans healthcare, in October. Speaking through a speaker system in front of the Supreme Court, activist Aaryn Lang urged the crowd to remain vigilant.

“We do not have the luxury of treating very real threats like a difference of opinion. It’s not that type of time. They really want us dead,” Lang said.

Republican lawmakers in state legislatures are relentlessly attacking the rights of LGBTQ people, particularly trans individuals. This year alone, 70 anti-LGBTQ laws have been signed into law, most targeting trans rights, and at least 26 states have laws or policies banning gender-affirming care, according to the Human Rights Campaign. 

From the Supreme Court, the march proceeded to the Heritage Foundation headquarters. The far-right think tank created the Project 2025 initiative, a blueprint to overhaul the federal government and attack trans and abortion rights under a potential second Trump administration. 

Marchers chanted, “Abortion rights are trans rights,” as they approached the Heritage Foundation, where DJ Griffin Maxwell Brooks and booming music received them. The crowd quickly fell into an impromptu dance party and formed a circle where marchers took turns showcasing their vogueing. Trans queer performance artist Qween Amor noted that the march was attended by a group diverse in both identity and age.

“I think it’s very empowering to see not just my generation, but also seeing younger generations coming up and finding themselves in a moment where we can be liberated together and to see a mix of intersectional identities. I think, for me, [that] lets me know that, you know, I’m alive and that there’s hope,” she told the Washington Blade. 

(Washington blade video by erkki forster)

The march then returned to Columbus Circle, where health organizations and political organizations had set up booths. Hundreds of banned books were distributed for free and all copies were claimed within two hours of the event’s start.

It was a particularly hot Saturday with temperatures reaching 87 degrees, but Columbus Circle continued to be filled with people late into the day. 

Page, known for his roles in films and series such as “Juno” and “The Umbrella Academy,” drew a large crowd when he took the stage to speak about his journey as a trans man. 

“When I was finally able to step back from the squirreling, foreboding, the self-battering, and torment, the messages to lie and hide grew faint. I was able to listen, at last, to embrace myself wholly. And goodness, do I want that feeling for everyone,” he said. “I love being trans. I love being alive, and I want everyone to have access to the care that has changed my life. So let’s fight for it.”


Máxima Mauricio Rodas, a transgender Latina activist and sex worker, participates in the Gender Liberation March that took place in D.C. on Sept. 14, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Erkki Forster)
Continue Reading

National

How data helps — and hurts — LGBTQ communities

‘Even when we prove we exist, we don’t get the resources we need’

Published

on

‘To convince people with power, especially resource allocation power, you need to have data,’ says MIT professor Catherine D’Ignazio.

When Scotland voted to add questions about sexuality and transgender status to its census, and clarified the definition of “sex,” it was so controversial it led to a court case.

It got so heated that the director of Fair Play for Women, a gender-critical organization, argued: “Extreme gender ideology is deeply embedded within the Scottish Government, and promoted at the highest levels including the First Minister.”

Data, like the census, “is often presented as being objective, being quantitative, being something that’s above politics,” says Kevin Guyan, author of “Queer Data.”

Listening to the deliberations in parliament breaks that illusion entirely. “There’s a lot of political power at play here,” says Guyan, “It’s very much shaped by who’s in the room making these decisions.”

Great Britain has been a ‘hotspot’ for the gender-critical movement. “You just really revealed the politics of what was happening at the time, particularly in association with an expanded anti-trans movement,” explains Guyan.

Ultimately, the LGBTQ community was counted in Scotland, which was heralded as a historic win.

This makes sense, says Amelia Dogan, a research affiliate in the Data plus Feminism Lab at MIT. “People want to prove that we exist.” 

Plus, there are practical reasons. “To convince people with power, especially resource allocation power, you need to have data,” says Catherine D’Ignazio, MIT professor and co-author of the book “Data Feminism.” 

When data isn’t collected, problems can be ignored. In short, D’Ignazio says, “What’s counted counts.” But, being counted is neither neutral nor a silver bullet. “Even when we do prove we exist, we don’t get the resources that we need,” says Dogan.

“There are a lot of reasons for not wanting to be counted. Counting is not always a good thing” they say. D’Ignazio points to how data has repeatedly been weaponized. “The U.S. literally used census data to intern Japanese people in the 1940s.” 

Nell Gaither, president of the Trans Pride Initiative, faces that paradox each day as she gathers and shares data about incarcerated LGBTQ people in Texas. 

“Data can be harmful in some ways or used in a harmful way,” she says, “they can use [the data] against us too.” She points to those using numbers of incarcerated transgender people to stoke fears around the danger of trans women, even though it’s trans women who face disproportionate risk in prison.

This is one of the many wrinkles the LGBTQ community and other minority communities face when working with or being represented by data.

There is a belief by some data scientists that limited knowledge of the subject is OK. D’Ignazio describes this as the “hubris of data science” where researchers believe they can make conclusions solely off a data set, regardless of background knowledge or previous bodies of knowledge. 

“In order to be able to read the output of a data analysis process, you need background knowledge,” D’Ignazio emphasizes. 

Community members, on the other hand, are often primed to interpret data about their communities. “That proximity gives us a shared vocabulary,” explains Nikki Stephens, a postdoctoral researcher in D’Ignazio’s Data plus Feminism lab. 

It can also make more rich data. When Stephens was interviewing other members of the transgender community about Transgender Day of Remembrance, they realized we “think more complicated and more meaningful thoughts, because we’re in community around it.” 

Community members are also primed to know what to even begin to look for.

A community may know about a widely known problem or need in their community, but they are invisible to institutions. “It’s like unknown to them because they haven’t cared to look,” says D’Ignazio.

That is how Gaither got involved in tracking data about incarcerated LGBTQ people in Texas in the first place.

Gaither received her first letter from an incarcerated person in 2013. As president of the Trans Pride Initiative, Gaither had predominately focused on housing and healthcare for trans people. The pivot to supporting the LGBTQ incarcerated community came out of need—trans prisoners were not given access to constitutionally mandated healthcare

Gaither sought a legal organization to help, but no one stepped in—they didn’t have expertise. So, Gaither figured it out herself.

As TPI continued to support incarcerated, queer Texans, the letters kept rolling in. Gaither quickly realized her correspondences told a story: definable instances of assault, misconduct, or abuse. 

With permission from those she corresponded with and help from volunteers, Gaither started tracking it. “We’re hearing from people reporting violence to us,” says Gaither, “we ought to log these.” TPI also tracks demographic information alongside instances of abuse and violence, all of which are publicly accessible

“It started off as just a spreadsheet, and then it eventually grew over the years into a database,” says Gaither, who constructed the MySQL database for the project. 

Gaither’s work especially focuses on the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), which ostensibly includes specific protections for transgender people. 

To be compliant with PREA, prisons must be audited once every three years. Numerous investigations have shown that these audits are often not effective. TPI has filed numerous complaints with the PREA Resource Center, demonstrating inaccuracies or bias, in addition to tracking thousands of PREA-related incidents. 

“We are trying to use our data to show the audits are ineffective,” says Gaither.

Gaither has been thinking about data since she was a teenager. She describes using a computer for the first time in the 1970s and being bored with everything except for dBASE, one of the first database management systems. 

“Ever since then, I’ve been fascinated with how you can use data and databases to understand what your work with data,” Gaither says. She went on to get a master’s in Library and Information Sciences and built Resource Center Dallas’s client database for transgender health.

But gathering, let alone analyzing, and disseminating data about queer people imprisoned in Texas has proven a challenge.

Some participants fear retaliation for sharing their experiences, while others face health problems that make pinpointing exact dates or times of assaults difficult.

And, despite being cited by The National PREA Resource Center and Human Rights Clinic at the University of Texas School of Law, Gaither still faces those who think her data “doesn’t seem to have as much legitimacy.” 

Stephens lauds Gaither’s data collection methods. “TPI collect their data totally consensually. They write to them first and then turn that data into data legible to the state and in the service of community care.” 

This is a stark contrast to the current status quo of data collection, says Dogan, “people, and all of our data, regardless of who you are, is getting scraped.” Data scraping refers to when information is imported from websites – like personal social media pages – and used as data.

AI has accelerated this, says D’Ignazio, “it’s like a massive vacuum cleaning of data across the entire internet. It’s this whole new level and scale of non-consensual technology.” 

Gaither’s method of building relationships and direct correspondence is a far cry from data scraping. Volunteers read, respond to, and input information from every letter. 

Gaither has become close to some of the people with whom she’s corresponded. Referring to a letter she received in 2013, Gaither says: “I still write to her. We’ve known each other for a long time. I consider her to be my friend.”

Her data is queer not simply in its content, but in how she chooses to keep the queer community centered in the process. “I feel very close to her so that makes the data more meaningful. It has a human component behind it,” says Gaither.

Guyan says that data can be seen as a “currency” since it has power. But he emphasizes that “people’s lives are messy, they’re complicated, they’re nuanced, they’re caveated, and a data exercise that relies on only ones and zeros can’t necessarily capture the full complexity and diversity of these lives.” 

While Gaither tallies and sorts the incidents of violence, so it is legible as this “currency,” she also grapples with the nuance of the situations behind the scenes. “It’s my family that I’m working with. I think it makes it more significant from a personal level,” says Gaither.

Guyan explains that queer data is not just about the content, but the methods. “You can adopt a queer lens in terms of thinking critically about the method you use when collecting, analyzing, and presenting all types of data.” 

(This story is part of the Digital Equity Local Voices Fellowship lab through News is Out. The lab initiative is made possible with support from Comcast NBCUniversal.)

Continue Reading

National

New twice-a-year HIV prevention drug found highly effective

Gilead announces 99.9% of participants in trial were HIV negative

Published

on

New HIV prevention drug Lenacapavir would replace oral medicines with twice-yearly injections.

The U.S. pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences announced on Sept. 12 the findings of its most recent Phase 3 clinical trial for its twice-yearly injectable HIV prevention drug Lenacapavir show the drug is highly effective in preventing HIV infections, even more so than the current HIV prevention or PrEP drugs in the form of a pill taken once a day.

There were just two cases of someone testing HIV positive among 2,180  participants in the drug study for the twice-yearly Lenacapavir, amounting to a 99.9 percent rate of effectiveness, the Gilead announcement says.

The announcement says the trial reached out to individuals considered at risk for HIV, including “cisgender men, transgender men, transgender women, and gender non-binary individuals in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, South Africa, Thailand and the United States who have sex with partners assigned male at birth.”

“With such remarkable outcomes across two Phase 3 studies, Lenacapavir has demonstrated the potential to transform the prevention of HIV and help to end the epidemic,” Daniel O’Day, chair and CEO of Gilead Sciences said in the announcement.

 “Now that we have a comprehensive dataset across multiple study populations, Gilead will work urgently with regulatory, government, public health, and community partners to ensure that, if approved, we can deliver twice-yearly Lenacapavir for PrEP worldwide for all those who want or need it,” he said.

Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+ Hepatitis Policy Institute, called Lenacapavir a “miracle drug” based on the latest studies, saying the optimistic findings pave the way for the potential approval of the drug by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2025.

“The goal now must be to ensure that people who have a reason to be on PrEP are able to access this miracle drug,” Schmid said in a Sept. 12 press release. “Thanks to the ACA [U.S. Affordable Care Act], insurers must cover PrEP without cost sharing as a preventive service,” he said.

“Insurers should not be given the choice to cover just daily oral PrEP, particularly given these remarkable results,” Schmid said in the release. “The Biden-Harris administration should immediately make that clear. To date, they have yet to do that for the first long-acting PrEP drug that new plans must cover,” he said.

Schmid, through the HIV+ Hepatitis Policy Institute, has helped to put together a coalition of national and local HIV/AIDS organizations advocating for full coverage of HIV treatment and prevention medication by health insurance companies.

A statement by Gilead says that if approved by regulatory agencies, “Lenacapavir for PrEP would be the first and only twice-yearly HIV prevention choice for people who need or want PrEP. The approval could transform the HIV prevention landscape for multiple populations in regions around the world and help end the epidemic.”

Continue Reading

Delaware

Sarah McBride wins Democratic primary in Del., poised to make history

State lawmaker likely to become first transgender person elected to Congress

Published

on

Delaware state Sen. Sarah McBride (Washington Blade photo by Daniel Truitt)

Delaware state Sen. Sarah McBride is poised to become the first openly transgender person elected to Congress after she won her primary on Tuesday.

McBride defeated Earl Cooper by a 79.9-16.2 percent margin in the Democratic primary for the state’s congressional seat. McBride will face Republican John Whalen in November.

The LGBTQ+ Victory Fund in a press release notes McBride is “favored to win in the heavily Democratic state.”

“Voters across the country are sick and tired of the divisive politics of the past — that’s why we’re seeing an increase in diverse, young candidates like Sarah McBride clearing their primaries,” said Victory Fund President Annise Parker. “Nobody is more qualified than Sarah to represent the values of Delaware in Congress. I look forward to celebrating Sarah’s election victory in November and seeing her get to work for her constituents in Washington.” 

McBride is poised to succeed U.S. Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), who is running for retiring U.S. Sen. Thomas Carper (D-Del.)’s seat.

“Of course, there’s going to be discussion about the potential of this campaign to break this barrier and to increase diversity in Congress and to ensure that a voice that has been totally absent from the halls of Congress is finally there in an elected capacity,” McBride told the Washington Blade during a 2023 interview after she declared her candidacy. “While it’s not what this campaign is focused on, while it’s not what voters are focused on, it is certainly relevant to the young people who are feeling alone and scared right now.”

Continue Reading

National

Thousands expected to participate in Gender Liberation March in D.C.

Participants will protest outside US Supreme Court, Heritage Foundation on Saturday

Published

on

Transgender rights icon Miss Major attends the Democratic National Convention in Chicago last month. She is expected to participate in the Gender Liberation March that will take place in D.C. on Sept. 14, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Thousands of people are expected to protest outside of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Heritage Foundation headquarters on Saturday as part of the first Gender Liberation March.

The march will unite abortion rights, transgender, LGBTQ, and feminist advocates to demand bodily autonomy and self-determination.

The Gender Liberation March follows the National Trans Liberation March that took place in D.C. in late August, and is organized by a collective of gender justice based groups that includes the organizers behind the Women’s Marches and the Brooklyn Liberation Marches. One of the core organizers, writer and activist Raquel Willis, explained the march will highlight assaults on abortion access and gender-affirming care by the Republican Party and right-wing groups as broader attacks on freedoms. 

“The aim for us was really to bring together the energies of the fight for abortion access, IVF access, and reproductive justice with the fight for gender-affirming care, and this larger kind of queer and trans liberation,” Willis said. “All of our liberation is bound up in each other’s. And so if you think that the attacks on trans people’s access to health care don’t include you, you are grossly mistaken. We all deserve to make decisions about our bodies and our destinies.”

The march targets the Heritage Foundation, the far-right think tank behind Project 2025, a blueprint to overhaul the federal government and attack trans and abortion rights under a potential second Trump administration. Protesters will also march on the Supreme Court, which is set to hear U.S. v. Skrmetti, a case with wide-reaching implications for medical treatment of trans youth, in October.

“This Supreme Court case could set precedent to further erode the rights around accessing this life-saving medical care. And we know that there are ramifications of this case that could also go beyond young people, and that’s exactly what the right wing apparatus that are pushing these bans want,” Eliel Cruz, another core organizer, said. 

According to the Human Rights Campaign, 70 anti-LGBTQ laws have been enacted this year so far, of which 15 ban gender-affirming care for trans youth.

The march will kick off at noon with an opening ceremony at Columbus Circle in front of Union Station. Trans rights icon Miss Major, and the actor and activist Elliot Page are among the scheduled speakers of the event. People from across the country are expected to turn out; buses are scheduled to bring participants to D.C. from at least nine cities, including as far away as Chattanooga, Tenn.

At 1 p.m. marchers will begin moving toward the Heritage Foundation and the Supreme Court, before returning to Columbus Circle at 3 p.m. for a rally and festival featuring a variety of activities, as well as performances by artists. 

Banned books will be distributed for free, and a youth area will host a drag queen story hour along with arts and crafts. The LGBTQ health organization FOLX will have a table to connect attendees to its HRT fund, and a voter engagement area will offer information on registering and participating in the upcoming election. A memorial space will honor those lost to anti-trans and gender-based violence. 

Cruz noted that the relentless ongoing attacks on the LGBTQ community and on fundamental rights can take a toll, and emphasized that the march offers a chance for people to come together.

“I’m really excited about putting our spin on this rally and making it a place that is both political, but also has levity and there’s fun and joy involved, because we can’t, you know, we can’t just only think about all the kind of massive amount of work and attacks that we’re facing, but also remember that together, we can get through it,” Cruz said.

Sign up for the march here. Bus tickets to the rally can be booked here.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

9th Circuit upholds lower court ruling that blocked anti-trans Ariz. law

Statute bans transgender girls from sports teams that correspond with gender identity

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday upheld a lower court’s decision that blocked enforcement of an Arizona law banning transgender girls from playing on public schools’ sports team that correspond with their gender identity.

Then-Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican, in 2022 signed the law.

The Associated Press reported the parents of two trans girls challenged the law in a lawsuit they filed in U.S. District Court in Tucson, Ariz., in April 2023. U.S. District Judge Jennifer Zipps on July 20, 2023, blocked the law.

Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, who was named as a defendant in the lawsuit, appealed the ruling to the 9th Circuit. Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes is not defending the law.

A three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit unanimously upheld Zipps’s ruling.

“We are pleased with the 9th Circuit’s ruling today, which held that the Arizona law likely violates the Equal Protection Clause and recognizes that a student’s transgender status is not an accurate proxy for athletic ability and competitive advantage,” said Rachel Berg, a staff attorney for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, in a press release.

NCLR represents the two plaintiffs in the case.

Continue Reading

Popular