ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “LGBT Rights

LGBT

Thousands March Against Hate In New York City

(Credit: Jeffrey James Keyes via Queerty)

Thousands marched Monday night in New York City to denounce the recent rash of anti-gay violence, including the murder of Mark Carson this weekend. The march to the spot where Carson was shot was led by City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, and Edie Windsor, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court challenge of the Defense of Marriage Act, and also included representatives from numerous other LGBT groups.

Glennda Testone, Executive Director of the city’s LGBT Community Center, addressed the crowd at the intersection of 8th Street and Sixth Avenue:

We have always been a community that takes care of each other.  Sometimes when no one else will. We’ll continue to do that. We will continue to show up for each other. There are hundreds of us here tonight, but the truth is, that there are five hundred thousand LGBT people who come to New York because they want to live openly. They want to be who they are, they want to love, and they should be able to do that. They should be able to do that on any street, any avenue, any neighborhood in this great city that we all love. [...]

The violence we’ve seen in recent weeks is a reminder. It’s a reminder that political and legal gains do not always necessarily translate immediately to the street, to every street, and to every person. This is a reminder. It’s why we need to stay united, it’s why we need our voices to be strong, and we can’t go back. We are here today not only to mourn the loss of our community, not only to take back some of our power, and to take back that sense of safety, but we are here together, as one, to create a strong voice that says we will not be threatened, we will not be harassed, we will not be taunted, and we will not be killed because of who we are and who we love.

More photos can be found at Queerty, Towleroad, and Joe.My.God. Watch a brief clips from the rally, including remarks from Carson’s aunt:

LGBT

Immigration Asylum And Detention Amendments Could Protect LGBT Immigrants

Last week, the bipartisan immigration reform bill survived its second week of Senate Judiciary Committee markups largely intact and faithful to the “Gang of 8’s” core principals, which would provide a pathway to earned citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in America.  Today, the Committee will debate proposed amendments to Title III of the bill, which will address interior enforcement of immigration laws, including asylum procedures, indefinite detention, and solitary confinement.  Here’s a rundown of what some upcoming amendments mean for LGBT immigrants:

Asylum

Homosexuality is currently a crime in 78 countries around the world.  The right to seek asylum from persecution is a core right necessary to protect LGBT people around the world from persecution.  Unfortunately, a major obstacle to LGBT immigrants availing themselves of asylum in the United States is a bureaucratic one.   Under the current law, asylum seekers are required to file an asylum application within one year of entering the U.S.  Currently, under the one-year filing deadline, refugees with credible claims are denied asylum simply because of a bureaucratic technicality.  The elimination of the one-year filing deadline is particularly important for LGBT asylum seekers, who often miss the one-year deadline because they either do not know that sexual orientation or gender-based persecution are grounds for seeking asylum or do not feel safe disclosing their LGBT status to U.S. government officials within a year of arriving in the United States.

The Bill currently would end the one-year filing deadline, but Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has proposed two amendments that would compromise this improvement:

  • Grassley’s amendment 27 would completely remove the language ending the one-year filing deadline.
  • Grassley’s amendment 52 would substantially delay the elimination of the one-year filing deadline for asylum applications.

Indefinite Detention and Solitary Confinement

Immigrants in detention, including asylum seekers, are locked up in jail-like facilities, separated from their families and communities.   LGBT detainees often experience increased rates of discrimination, mistreatment and abuse both at the hands of fellow detainees and by guards.  Furthermore, a New York Times story this spring found that prolonged solitary confinement has been used on LGBT detainees under the guise of protecting them.  Some upcoming amendments improve the situation of LGBT immigrants in detention facilities, while others place them at greater risk of harm:

  • Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s (D-CT) amendment 2 would prohibit the use of solitary confinement based on sexual orientation and gender identity and stop ICE from using solitary confinement for “protection” of detainees.
  • Despite Constitutional precedent prohibiting the indefinite detention of immigrants, Grassley amendment 53 requiring the indefinite detention of immigrants who cannot be deported, without even the basic protection of a bond hearing to determine if they should be detained in the first place.  His amendment would also require the prolonged detention of arriving asylum seekers, including people seeking protection in the US from persecution on account of their sexual or gender identity.
  • Grassley 51 would eliminate the bill’s expansion of alternatives to detention.  Alternatives to detention seek to make detention less restrictive and less costly for immigrants who have no criminal background and do not pose a flight risk.  For LGBT detainees, who have historically faced unsafe conditions in traditional detention facilities, alternatives offer a way to remain in their support communities while awaiting the outcome of their cases.
  • Senator Jeff Session’s (R-AL) amendment 5 would impose a mandatory 60-day sentence of imprisonment for any immigrant who overstays his or her visa unless the person can be removed within 90 days.  Not only would the amendment require incarceration with no determination of an immigrant’s actual risk to public safety, it would also subject some asylum seekers and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals to mandatory imprisonment.

Sharita Gruberg is a Policy Analyst for the LGBT Immigration Project at the Center for American Progress.

Alyssa

Outspoken LGBT Advocate Chris Kluwe Signs With Oakland Raiders

(Credit: Getty Images)

Chris Kluwe, the National Football League punter who has been an outspoken advocate for LGBT equality both inside and outside sports, announced Thursday that he will sign a one-year contract with the Oakland Raiders. Kluwe played the previous eight seasons for the Minnesota Vikings before being cut earlier this month after the Vikings selected a punter in the 5th round of April’s NFL Draft.

Kluwe, incidentally, is moving from one state that just passed marriage equality (Minnesota) to one where same-sex marriage is still illegal (California), and he told fellow LGBT ally Brendon Ayanbadejo that he will remain an advocate for LGBT rights when he joins the Raiders, Ayanbadejo wrote on FOXSports.com:

Kluwe is known for his mind and mouth, as well as his leg. He is a vocal advocate of equality in sports (and life), and says he will continue to speak for what he believes.

“I’m still going to be myself socially and continue to tweet and interact with my fans,” Kluwe said.

Kluwe and Ayanbadejo were both released by their teams this spring, immediately fueling speculation around the sports world that their advocacy had been a factor in the teams’ decisions. Even Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton (D) weighed in when Kluwe was cut, saying, “Yeah, I don’t feel good about it,” an implication that Kluwe’s outspokenness played a role in his release. Others raised similar questions when the Baltimore Ravens released Ayanbadejo.

Though Ayanbadejo remains unsigned, Kluwe’s new contract should put those concerns to rest. The reality is that the release of both players looked more like business decisions — Kluwe was due $1.45 million in 2013, nearly $1 million more than the Vikings will pay his rookie replacement. Ayanbadejo, meanwhile, was an aging 36-year-old linebacker who primarily played special teams, and considering that the Ravens handed out a record contract to quarterback Joe Flacco, his $940,000 salary at an easy-to-replace position made him expendable (he was hardly the only prominent Raven to fall victim to cost-cutting this offseason).

And as as Cyd Zeigler argued at OutSports when the Vikings cut Kluwe, immediate speculation without evidence that advocacy played a role in their releases can be counterproductive to the cause they are pushing, Ayanbadejo, Kluwe, and other players have fought to make the NFL a more open and inclusive place both for advocates of LGBT rights and for gay players. But painting football as a place where those voices still aren’t welcome, where speaking out carries the penalty of losing one’s job, only encourages allies to remain quiet and gay players to stay in the closet. And it ignores the progress the league as made. Despite hiccups along the way, the NFL has indeed become a more open place: not only are Kluwe and Ayanbadejo speaking out, but so are both NFL Players Association president Dominque Foxworth and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, and the league has strengthened its efforts to rid the game of discrimination and homophobia.

If evidence existed that Kluwe and Ayanbadejo’s advocacy played a role in either situation, it should be publicized, shamed, and subject to the league’s non-discrimination policy. It’s far more likely, though, that Kluwe and Ayanbadejo were cut because football, as Zeigler explained, “is a numbers game.” Making legitimate business decisions doesn’t make a football team discriminatory, and treating legitimate business decisions as discriminatory only ensures that football will remain in the shadows of tolerance for far longer than it should.

LGBT

The Losing Arguments Of Anti-LGBT ‘Alliance Defending Freedom’

As state legislatures around the country move to enact marriage equality and civil unions, an anti-gay Christian legal and policy coalition calling itself the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) has become a ubiquitous presence at committee hearings. But their misleading testimony in defense of the right to discriminate has done virtually nothing to advance their cause — and may even undermine it.

As the Delaware Senate debated a marriage equality bill earlier this month, opponents brought ADF senior counsel Jordan Lorence to the floor to offer testimony. Lorence noted a case in New Mexico (a state which don’t even allow same-sex marriage), in which an anti-gay vendor had faced legal action after violating state civil rights laws, and suggested that he believes such public accommodations laws are unconstitutional. “It’s the business owners that deal with weddings. It’s licensed professionals having their licenses threatened because they believe the wrong things about marriage,” he told the Senators.

Delaware state Sen. Dave Sokola (D), lead Senate sponsor of the bill, told ThinkProgress that Lorence’s right-to-discriminate arguments actually helped solidify support for the bill:

We had recently added “sexual orientation” to our non-discrimination statute in 2009, and debated and passed Civil Unions just 2 years ago. Even with a large turn-over in both the House and Senate, this issue was very fresh in many of our minds. Equality Delaware did a tremendous outreach to all, with a special emphasis on our newer legislators, so there was sufficient understanding of the matter, and I do think he just firmed up the positions of all on the prevailing side. We also now have a 4-year track record of how Delaware businesses are doing with respect to this, and the predictions of our opponents have not come true since we enacted either of the previous bills. The facts have significantly diminished their credibility.

Lorence also made this argument to the Delaware House of Representatives. Sokola’s House counterpart, Rep. Melanie Smith (D), told ThinkProgress: “I believe he was mistaken in much of what he said and misrepresented the bill significantly.” She added that as far as she knew, “no votes were swayed by his testimony.” The bill passed both chambers and was signed into law by Gov. Jack Markell (D).

Lorence also offered similar testimony in 2011 before the Maryland House Judiciary Committee, warning that “small businesses that decline to serve or participate in same-sex ceremonies could be sued for discrimination by a public accommodation,” ignoring the fact that Maryland law had prohibited such discrimination since 2001. The committee recommended the bill and voters enacted the law last year. Read more

LGBT

Mondale, Dukakis Back Marriage Equality, Joining Every Living Democratic Presidential Nominee

Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale

Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale

Former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis told ThinkProgress this week that they support marriage equality. With their endorsements, every living former Democratic presidential nominee is now on record in support of same-sex marriage.

Every other living Democratic nominee had previously made their support explicit.

The list includes:

  • 1. Former President Jimmy Carter (1976 and 1980). Carter said last year “Homosexuality was well known in the ancient world, well before Christ was born and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. In all of his teachings about multiple things — he never said that gay people should be condemned. I personally think it is very fine for gay people to be married in civil ceremonies.”
  • 2. Former Vice President Walter Mondale (1984). Mondale, who invoked civil rights legend Hubert Humphrey as he campaigned against last year’s proposed Minnesota marriage inequality amendment, said in an e-mail that he not both “opposed the constitutional amendment that would prevent legalizing gay marriage and I supported the legalization of gay marriage adopted this past week in Minnesota.
  • 3. Former Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis (1988). Dukakis confirmed his support to ThinkProgress in a May 12 e-mail.
  • 4. Former President Bill Clinton (1992 and 1996). Clinton announced his support for marriage equality in 2009 and has actively campaigned for it since. Clinton had previously signed the anti-gay 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
  • 5. Former Vice President Al Gore (2000). Gore delivered a “forceful endorsement” of marriage equality in 2008, saying “gay men and women ought to have the same rights as heterosexual men and women — to make contracts, to have hospital visiting rights, to join together in marriage.”
  • 6. Secretary of State John Kerry (2004). Kerry told the blog Blue Mass Group in 2008 that he “absolutely” supported civil marriage equality. He explained his evolution in a 2011 Boston Globe op-ed entitled “Politicians have the right to evolve on gay marriage.”
  • 7. President Barack Obama (2008 and 2012). President Obama made his historic announcement one year ago, telling ABC’s Robin Roberts: “I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.

Former Senator George McGovern (D-SD), the 1972 Democratic nominee, also endorsed marriage equality prior to his death last year. He told the Daily Republic last May: “I’m a ‘conservative’ when it comes to marriage. I think if two people love each other, are living together and having sex, they ought to get married.”

To date, no living Republican nominee or president has endorsed same-sex marriage.

Update

A reader noted that former President Gerald Ford (R) also supported equal rights for same-sex couples before his death, saying in 2001, “I think they ought to be treated equally. Period.”

LGBT

Tea Party Congressman Attacks Obama For Calling First Openly Gay NBA Player, Wishes He’d Called Tebow Instead

Rep. Steve King (R-IA)

Years from now, when the United States is a shell of its former self and we are ruled by hedonist overlords, schoolchildren will look back on April 29, 2013 as the fateful day when President Obama called Jason Collins after he became the first openly gay NBA player, thus undermining American culture forever.

This is the type of future envisioned by Rep. Steve King (R-IA) on the House floor last week. In a freewheeling discussion of everything from immigration to Russian Marxists, the Iowa congressman criticized Obama’s decision to call Collins after his courageous move. “These are the ways that culture gets undermined,” King lamented. “One notch at a time, American civilization, American culture, western civilization, western Judeo-Christiandom are eroded.”

King contrasted Obama’s chat with Collins to the fact that the president hasn’t personally called ex-New York Jets quarterback Tim Tebow, “who will kneel and pray to God on the football field.”

KING: I hear the president reducing or lowering American values by his comments that take place in the public and in the press. Think about the things he’s chosen to take sides on. [...] Then we’ve got Tim Tebow who will kneel and pray to God on the football field. Meanwhile we have a professional athlete that decides he’s going to announce his sexuality and he gets a personal call from the United States to highlight the sexuality of a professional ballplayer. These are ways that the culture gets undermined, where it gets divided. The people over on this side take their followership from that kind of leadership. One notch at a time, American civilization, American culture, western civilization, western Judeo-Christiandom are eroded.

Watch it:

King has a storied history as a culture warrior since entering the House in 2003. He has argued that marriage equality is a “purely socialist concept“, belittled marriage equality by saying “you don’t need a license to begin a new friendship,” contended that LGBT people should have to hide their orientation at work, and said that children will be raised in “warehouses” if conservatives don’t “defend marriage”.

LGBT

Scouts For Equality Rally For Inclusive Boy Scouts Of America

Scouts for Equality, the Boy Scout alumni association working to end the Boy Scouts of America’s national policy of mandatory discrimination against LGBT Scouts and leaders, held a national day of action Friday. The dozens of events at Scout councils across the country encouraged the national representatives from each to back a proposed rule change to allow openly gay Scouts and to also push for an end to the exclusion of LGBT adults as volunteers and professionals with the organization.

In Bethesda, Maryland, dozens of Eagle Scouts, current Scouts, parents, and volunteer leaders gathered outside the National Capital Area Council headquarters. Scores of cars passing on the highway next to the building honked in support, while attendees held signs urging and end to the ban.

ThinkProgress talked with several participants. Debbie Heller, mother of an Eagle Scout and wife of a former Scoutmaster, said that “I think Scouting is the greatest organization in the world, but if they continue to discriminate, I could couldn’t support” the BSA.

Eagle Scout David Churchill observed: “Discrimination is wrong.” Noting that the Boy Scout law requires all Scouts to be kind, he said “the organization needs to reflect that as well.

Jody Benjamin, a former Den leader and committee chair, objected to the current requirement that troop leaders kick out youths who identify as gay. “The Scouts are asking me to be a liar or to do a really hurtful thing to a child. I can’t do it, and so I think it’s wrong.”

Justis Tunia, who earned his Eagle Scout award in Layton, Utah in 1995, lamented that events like this were necessary. “It’s a shame that we as former members and families associated with Scouting have to push the organization in this direction, as these were values that were taught to us throughout our period in Scouting.”

Andrew Kragie, who was Senior Patrol Leader of his Washington, DC troop and achieved the Eagle rank in 2010, noted that he worked to teach younger Scouts not to bully and to respect all others. “Just being accepting about different people, it was the basic tenets of living together and being at a camp site together.”

Eagle Scout Harris Walker, a North Carolina native, noted that he has LGBT family members. “I want to see my nephews be able to participate in a Scouting organization where their mothers can be their Den mothers.”

And Jerald Lentini, who earned his Eagle Scout award in Georgia, explained that “Scouting is a trail, and we’re being told that we should be leaving some of our fellow hikers on that trail, along the wayside, because they are different than us.”

Watch the video:

Roughly 1,400 representatives will vote on May 24 whether to end the ban on gay Scouts. It is unclear whether they will also be allowed to vote on proposals to also eliminate allow LGBT adults into the program.

LGBT

BREAKING: Minnesota House Passes Marriage Equality

MN Freedom to Marry supporters

(Credit: Glen Stubbe/Star Tribune)

The Minnesota House of Representatives approved marriage equality (HF 1054) by a vote of 75 to 59. It now proceeds to the Senate, where it has already been endorsed by both the Judiciary and Finance Committees.

Openly lesbian Rep. Karen Clark (DFL), author of the bill, told her colleagues that “Freedom means freedom for everyone.” With her support, the House unanimously adopted an amendment by Rep. David FitzSimmons (R) changing all references to “marriage” in the state law to “civil marriage.” An amendment by Rep. Tim Kelly (R) to replace all Minnesota marriages with civil unions was rejected, 22 to 111.

The Senate will take up the bill Monday and Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk (DFL) has said he believes he has the votes to pass it.

Gov. Mark Dayton (DFL) has promised to sign the bill and has said enactment would represent “a society-changing, breakthrough moment” for the North Star state.

Minnesota voters rejected a 2012 marriage inequality constitutional amendment (with just 47 percent voting in favor) and a recent poll found 51 percent of Minnesotans now support marriage equality.

Update

71 of the 73 DFL (Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party, Minnesota’s Democratic party) members of the House voted in favor. All but four of the 61 House Republicans voted against marriage equality.

LGBT

Major Conservative Backers Of Immigration Reform Bill Also Support Protections For Same-Sex Couples

Supporters of LGBT immigration reforms

(Credit: NY Daily News)

The three major Republican-leaning outside groups running ads in support of a comprehensive immigration reform bill are all backed by strong supporters of legal equality for same-sex couples. Despite conservative warnings that including protections for bi-national same-sex couples would torpedo the bill, there appears to be wider bipartisan support for equal rights for gay and lesbian couples.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), one of four Republican co-sponsors of the proposed Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, said last week that adoption of an amendment to allow gay and lesbian Americans equal rights to sponsor their non-citizen partners for green cards would “virtually guarantee” that the broader bill would not pass the Senate. He warned that “if that issue is injected into this bill, the bill will fail and the coalition that helped put it together will fall apart.”

The conservative groups running ads in support of immigration reform include FWD.US‘s Americans for a Conservative Direction, the American Action Network, and the National Immigration Forum Action Fund. A ThinkProgress review of top supporters of those groups finds several vocal supporters of LGBT rights.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, disputes Rubio’s assessment that LGBT protections would imperil immigration reform. “It’s not going to kill the bill,” he told Politico. Others noted to the publication that many made same threats about LGBT protections included in the Violence Against Women Act re-authorization, which garnered 78 votes in the U.S. Senate. Those provisions, like the bi-national couples protections, were opposed by Catholic bishops and some Evangelical groups.

As of today, 54 Senators have publicly endorsed marriage equality (including Republicans Mark Kirk of Illinois and Rob Portman of Ohio). Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) is a co-sponsor of the Uniting American Families Act, a stand alone version of the amendment, and has endorsed the idea of inclusion of the provisions in a comprehensive reform package. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has endorsed equal legal rights for same-sex couples, through civil unions, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has said she is “evolving” toward supporting marriage equality. And the three Senate Democrats who have not yet endorsed marriage equality have each been supportive of other LGBT rights.

If Rubio and fellow Gang of Eight members Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lindsay Graham (R-SC), and John McCain (R-AZ) joined with these Senators, the bill could easily obtain the 60 votes needed to prevent any filibuster.

But Rubio partnered with the National Organization for Marriage last year to make robocalls against same-sex marriage and boasted of the endorsement of the Family Research Council, an anti-LGBT hate group. While he attempts to spin his opposition to inclusion of LGBT protections as concern for the bill, the fate of the bill really appears to rest in Rubio’s own hands.

Immigration

Paperwork Technicality May Send Gay Immigrant Back to Senegal

Michel Mendy

A gay man may soon be deported to his country of origin where homosexuality is a crime, all thanks to a small paperwork technicality. Michel Mendy, an artist who came from Senegal to America on a performance visa, faces imminent removal because he has been charged with not informing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of an address change.

In 2010, Mendy was shot as a bystander during a robbery. When he woke up in the hospital police officers approached Mendy not about being the victim of a robbery, but were curious instead about his immigration status. Mendy was detained for overstaying his performance visa, but then released only after posting bail. For the past three months, Mendy has been held in an ICE detention center for failing to update his address change, which according to ICE’s draconian actions, is a violation serious enough to warrant deportation. Although ICE had visited Mendy at his new residence, the government branch claims that Mendy never informed them about his address change. Mendy did however notify the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) about his address change.

Under the threat of deportation, Mendy is assured to face assault or even death since homosexuality is illegal in Senegal. Even without evidence, a gay man can be sentenced to as many as eight years in prison for having sex. He can also be fired from his job. Under current law Mendy could qualify for asylum, but the immigration system has instead relegated him into legal limbo.

A rally to protest his removal will be held on Monday at the Detroit ICE detention center where Mendy is held.

Mendy is not a criminal, but a low-priority case according to a 2011 “prosecutorial discretion” memo released by ICE Director John Morton prior to Mendy’s 2013 apprehension. If Mendy is deported, that does not comport with ICE’s message of focusing on high-priority cases, which it has repeatedly ignored even after its hyped-up assurance that low-priority cases will be handled without the fear of deportation.

Unfortunately without the help of activists, Michel Mendy is just one of the many low-priority individuals for whom the fear of deportation has not been lifted.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up