National
Nev. federal court rules against same-sex marriage
Jones determines heterosexuals might not marry if gay couples can
A district judge in Nevada upheld the state’s same-sex marriage ban
A federal court in Nevada has ruled against allowing same-sex couples to marry on the basis that they can’t procreate and gay people aren’t a politically powerless class.
In a 41-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Robert Jones, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, granted summary judgment in favor of the state of Nevada against claims its prohibition of same-sex marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Among the reasons why Jones, a Mormon who attended Brigham Young University, finds gay couples lack a constitutional right to marry is a rational basis for the government to preclude couples who can’t bear children from marrying:
“Human beings are created through the conjugation of one man and one woman. The percentage of human beings conceived through non-traditional methods is minuscule and adoption, the form of child-rearing in which same-sex couples may typically participate together, is not an alternative means of creating children, but rather a social backstop for when traditional biological families fail. The perpetuation of the human race depends upon traditional procreation between men and women. The institution developed in our society, its predecessor societies, and by nearly all societies on Earth throughout history to solidify, standardize, and legalize the relationship between a man, a woman, and their offspring, is civil marriage between one man and one woman.”
Moreover, Jones determines that straight couples may be disinclined to marry if same-sex couples were allowed to enter into the same institution, which would result in additional societal problems:
“Should that institution be expanded to include same-sex couples with the state’s imprimatur, it is conceivable that a meaningful percentage of heterosexual persons would cease to value the civil institution as highly as they previously had and hence enter into it less frequently, opting for purely private ceremonies, if any, whether religious or secular, but in any case without civil sanction, because they no longer wish to be associated with the civil institution as redefined, leading to an increased percentage of out-of-wedlock children, single-parent families, difficulties in property disputes after the dissolution of what amount to common law marriages in a state where such marriages are not recognized, or other unforeseen consequences.”
The ruling was made in the case of Sevick v. Sandoval, which Lambda Legal filed on behalf of eight plaintiff couples in Nevada. The lead plaintiffs are Beverly Sevcik and Mary Baranovich of Carson City, who’ve been together for nearly 41 years. The plaintiffs contend Nevada’s law is unconstitutional because excluding of same-sex couples from marriage while relegating them to domestic partnerships violates their right to equal treatment under the U.S. Constitution.
Tara Borelli, a Lambda staff attorney, said the district court decision is “not the end of this fight” and vowed to appeal the decision to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
“This entire decision rests on the ridiculous premise that a ‘meaningful percentage of heterosexual persons’ will decide not to get married if same-sex couples can,” Borelli said. “Not only is this not true, but it is settled law that the government is not allowed to cater to private biases – which is all that imagining that ‘some couples won’t join this club if those people are admitted’ amounts to. We are confident this ruling will be overturned on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.”
The ruling was filed on Monday, but had only come to the attention to the media on Thursday because the court made no previous announcement it had issued a decision.
Notably, Jones determines that Baker v. Nelson, a 1972 case on same-sex marriage that the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear for want of federal question, should serve as precedent, even though the case is 40 years old, because it relied on a equal protection claim.
At the same time, Jones says Perry v. Brown, a more recent case against California’s Proposition 8 in which same-sex marriage was found unconstitutional, shouldn’t have bearing on Nevada because that case involved taking away marriage rights that already existed in the Golden State as opposed to the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry when a domestic partnership system exists.
Doug NeJaime, who’s gay and a law professor at Loyola Law School, said the treatment of the Perry decision is the “most interesting thing” about the ruling because it shows the ramifications of the limited scope of the Ninth Circuit’s decision against Prop 8.
“The Ninth Circuit frames Perry very narrowly, partly, I think, in an attempt to convince the Supreme Court that they don’t need to get involved, and now we’re seeing the ramifications of that, which is this court within Ninth Circuit interpreting Perry so as not to apply,” he said.
It’s not the first time in recent history that a federal court has upheld a statute against same-sex marriage. In August, U.S. District Judge Alan Kay ruled Hawaii’s ban on same-sex marriage is constitutional using much of the same reasoning found in Jones’ decision.
In addition to ruling that Nevada’s law against same-sex marriage is constitutional on a rational basis standard of review, Jones also disputes the idea that laws related to sexual orientation should be subjected to heightened scrutiny, or a greater assumption they’re unconstitutional. That view has been articulated by President Obama in his decision that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional and the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals in its ruling against DOMA.
For starters, Jones dismisses the idea that gays and lesbians are politically powerless — a condition necessary for a class to be considered eligible for heightened scrutiny — because of the gains made by the LGBT community in recent years:
Homosexuals serve openly in federal and state political offices. The president of the United States has announced his personal acceptance of the concept of same-sex marriage and the announcement was widely applauded in the national media. Not only has the president expressed his moral support, he has directed the attorney general not to defend against legal challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), a federal law denying recognition to same-sex marriages at the federal level. It is exceedingly rare that a president refuses in his official capacity to defend a democratically enacted federal law in court based upon his personal political disagreements. That the homosexual-rights lobby has achieved this indicates that the group has great political power.
Jones also denies that gays and lesbians are politically powerless on the basis of the victories for same-sex marriage that were seen on Election Day:
At the state level, homosexuals recently prevailed during the 2012 general elections on same-sex marriage ballot measures in the States of Maine, Maryland and Washington, and they prevailed against a fourth ballot measure that would have prohibited same sex marriage under the Minnesota Constitution. It simply cannot be seriously maintained, in light of these and other recent democratic victories, that homosexuals do not have the ability to protect themselves from discrimination through democratic processes such that extraordinary protection from majoritarian processes is appropriate.
Not mentioned in the Jones ruling is the passage of a state constitutional amendment in North Carolina just months ago that defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
NeJaime said the rejection of heightened scrutiny is also noteworthy, although he’s skeptical about the conclusions the court reaches in this assessment.
“I think some of those conclusions strike me as a little bit shaky — the idea that now that same-sex marriage has a few ballot victories contributes to the idea that gays and lesbians have political power, and the conclusion that the history of discrimination against gays and lesbians does not rise to the level that would lead to the heightened scrutiny findings,” NeJaime said. “I think those kinds of conclusions would be susceptible to being overruled if the Ninth Circuit were to take this case.”
The ruling comes to light on the eve before the U.S. Supreme Court is set to consider whether to take up litigation challenging DOMA and Prop 8.
Nan Hunter, a lesbian law professor at Georgetown University, said the arguments against gays and lesbians being a politically powerless class may be preview of arguments to come before the Supreme Court.
“Perhaps most interesting is the extent to which this judge’s analysis focuses on the political powerlessness question, finding that gay people are too well regarded in majoritarian legislatures to justify judicial invalidation of laws that emerge from those legislatures,” Hunter said. “I think that this aspect of Equal Protection review will be a major focus in the Supreme Court, assuming that it grants review in any of the gay-related cases, and this decision provides a good preview of what the opponents of gay marriage will argue.”
NeJaime speculated the Nevada decision may encourage justices not to take up the Prop 8 case, allowing same-sex marriage to return to California.
“I don’t necessarily think it would have a direct impact, but I think the court would know the Perry has been interpreted very narrowly by another court in the Ninth Circuit, which might bolster support for the idea that they don’t have to take Perry,” NeJaime said.
National
National resources for trans and gender diverse communities
Amid attacks, help is available from wide range of organizations
The Trump administration has launched a series of executive orders and other initiatives restricting the rights of the transgender community since taking power in January, targeting military service, affirming healthcare, and participation in sports.
Though many executive orders are being challenged in court, it’s an uncertain time for a community that feels threatened. Despite the uncertainty, there are resources out there to help.
From legal assistance to mental health support, here’s a list of nonprofits and organizations dedicated to improving the everyday livelihood of trans and gender diverse people. These are mostly national organizations; there are many additional groups that work in local communities across the country. Some of these national groups will connect those in need of help to a local organization.
LEGAL HELP
President Trump issued an executive order declaring there are only two genders –– male and female –– which applies to legal documents and passports. The order doesn’t recognize the idea that one can transition their gender at birth to another gender.
Ash Lazarus Orr filed to renew his passport with a gender marker reflecting his identity. That was in January, and he still hasn’t received it. He refused to accept a passport without an accurate identification of who he is, so he filed a lawsuit with the ACLU in what is now known as Orr v. Trump.
Orr told the Washington Blade that not receiving his passport back has taken away his freedom of visiting family in Canada and receiving gender-affirming care from a trusted provider in Ireland.
The one thing getting him through this uncertain time is knowing who he’s fighting for –– the trans community, his loved ones, and himself.
“I’m trying to be that person that those younger parts of me needed growing up,” Orr said. Check out a couple of legal support organizations below:
Transgender Law Center
The Transgender Law Center (TLC) provides legal resources and assistance. TLC has a list –– called the Attorney Solidarity Network –– of attorneys that can provide advice or representation for trans people.
The organization also has a legal information help desk that answers questions regarding laws or policies impacting trans people.
Website: transgenderlawcenter.org
Phone: 510-587-9696
Email: [email protected]
Advocates For Trans Equality
With a variety of different programs tailored toward legal assistance and advocacy work, Advocates For Trans Equality’s reach is wide.
The non-profit offers the Name Change Project, which provides pro bono legal name change services to low-income trans, gender-non-conforming and nonbinary people by utilizing its partnerships with law firms and corporate law departments.
Advocates For Trans Equality also has departments and programs dedicated to increasing voter engagement, educating lawmakers on trans issues and offering litigation assistance to a small number of cases.
Website: transequality.org
Phone: 202-642-4542
General email: [email protected]
To contact a specific department or program, visit its website above.
ADVOCACY
Looking to take action and get involved? Act now.
American Civil Liberties Union
The ACLU is a national nonprofit organization that mobilizes local communities and advocates for national causes.
Getting involved is as easy as filling out letters to representatives or signing petitions. One live petition is to “defend trans freedom.”
You can also join its People Power platform, where you serve as a volunteer in your community to “advance civil liberties and civil rights for all.” ACLU has different chapters across the country, so visit its website for more information.
Website: aclu.org
Phone: 212-549-2500
MILITARY AND VETERANS
Trump signed an executive order in January banning transgender service members from serving, stating their identity “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.”
Though the order has been legally challenged and struck down by a judge, U.S. Navy Lieutenant Rae Timberlake said it’s created an uncertain atmosphere for themself and other troops.
“All of the transgender service members I know have served with honor and integrity for many years…[and we’re] targeted for removal and not subject to any kind of review based on merit,” Timberlake, who joined the Navy at age 17, said. “There’s kind of just this cloud looming over our organizations and our units, because we know any day our transgender shipmates could no longer be on the team.”
But Timberlake’s message to any service member struggling because of the executive order was one of compassion and truth: “There’s no policy that can take away what you’ve accomplished and what you’ve done.”
Here are some organizations that support service members and veterans:
SPARTA Pride
SPARTA is a peer-support group composed of active duty, veteran and “future warrior” service members.
The group also engages in advocacy work and has helped change policies on gender neutral uniforms and reducing the time a trans service member would have to wait to return to their duties during their transition.
Contact SPARTA to learn more about joining its support network.
Website: spartapride.org
Email: [email protected]
Modern Military Association
Modern Military supports service members and veterans through advocacy, legal assistance and mental health support.
It tracks LGBTQ+ and HIV discrimination through reports made on its website, and offers guidance and advice to whoever submitted the report.
It also supports the mental health of LGBTQ+ veterans and their families through its Resilient Heroes Program. By signing up, you’ll receive virtual peer support and case management services with a mental health coordinator.
Website: modernmilitary.org
Phone: 202-328-3244
Email: [email protected]
CRISIS & MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT
If you have a more urgent matter, or just need someone to listen, here are some organizations you can reach out to:
The Trevor Project
The Trevor Project offers 24/7 counseling services. Calling, texting or chatting is free and confidential, and you’ll get to speak with someone specialized in supporting LGBTQ youth.
The organization also focuses on public education by hosting online LGBTQ suicide prevention trainings. It advocates for policies and laws that contribute to supporting queer youth.
Website: thetrevorproject.org
Crisis hotline: 1-866-488-7386
General inquiry phone number: 212-695-8650
Trans Lifeline
Trans Lifeline is a hotline run and operated by trans people. Whether you’re questioning if you’re trans or are a trans person just wanting to talk, someone will be there to help. It’s free and confidential, and there won’t be any non-consensual active rescue, such as calling the emergency services.
The line is not 24/7, however. Check out its website for hours within your time zone.
Website: translifeline.org
Phone: 877-565-8860
Here are other organizations that offer support to the trans community:
TransFamilies (support): Support for families with a gender diverse child.
TransLatina Coalition (advocacy): Advocates for the specific needs of the transgender, gender expansive and intersex communities in the U.S.
TransAthlete (information): Provides informative resources about trans athletes.
Campaign for Southern Equality’s Trans Youth Emergency Project (healthcare support): A fund to help trans youth access lifesaving healthcare.
TransTech Social (economic empowerment): Dedicated to discovering and empowering the career-ready skills of LGBTQ+ people.
World Professional Association For Transgender Health (health): Resources, symposiums and research dedicated to improving transgender health.
Sylvia Rivera Law Project (legal): Legal programs and services for marginalized communities.
Gender Spectrum (support): Resources and support groups for trans youth and families.
The Okra Project (support): Creates and supports initiatives that provide resources for the Black Trans community.
The White House
White House does not ‘respond’ to reporters’ requests with pronouns included
Government workers were ordered not to self-identify their gender in emails
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and a senior advisor in the Department of Government Efficiency rejected requests from reporters who included their pronouns in the signature box of their emails, each telling different reporters at the New York Times that “as a matter of policy,” the Trump-Vance administration will decline to engage with members of the press on these grounds.
News of the correspondence between the journalists and the two senior officials was reported Tuesday by the Times, which also specified that when reached for comment, the White House declined to “directly say if their responses to the journalists represented a new formal policy of the White House press office, or when the practice had started.”
“Any reporter who chooses to put their preferred pronouns in their bio clearly does not care about biological reality or truth and therefore cannot be trusted to write an honest story,” Leavitt told the Times.
Department of Government Efficiency Senior Advisor Katie Miller responded, “I don’t respond to people who use pronouns in their signatures as it shows they ignore scientific realities and therefore ignore facts.”
Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, wrote in an email to the paper: “If The New York Times spent the same amount of time actually reporting the truth as they do being obsessed with pronouns, maybe they would be a half-decent publication.”
A reporter from Crooked media who got an email similar to those received by the Times reporters said, “I find it baffling that they care more about pronouns than giving journalists accurate information, but here we are.”
The practice of adding pronouns to asocial media bios or the signature box of outgoing emails has been a major sticking point for President Donald Trump’s second administration since Inauguration Day.
On day one, the White House issued an executive order stipulating that the federal government recognizes gender as a binary that is immutably linked to one’s birth sex, a definition excludes the existence of intersex and transgender individuals, notwithstanding the biological realities that natal sex characteristics do not always cleave neatly into male or female, nor do they always align with one’s gender identity .
On these grounds, the president issued another order that included a directive to the entire federal government workforce through the Office of Personnel Management: No pronouns in their emails.
As it became more commonplace in recent years to see emails with “she/her” or “he/him” next to the sender’s name, title, and organization, conservatives politicians and media figures often decried the trend as an effort to shoehorn woke ideas about gender (ideas they believe to be unscientific), or a workplace accommodation made only for the benefit of transgender people, or virtue-signaling on behalf of the LGBTQ left.
There are, however, any number of alternative explanations for why the practice caught on. For example, a cisgender woman may have a gender neutral name like Jordan and want to include “she/her” to avoid confusion.
A spokesman for the Times said: “Evading tough questions certainly runs counter to transparent engagement with free and independent press reporting. But refusing to answer a straightforward request to explain the administration’s policies because of the formatting of an email signature is both a concerning and baffling choice, especially from the highest press office in the U.S. government.”
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Air Force rescinds rule barring inclusion of preferred pronouns in email signatures
Conflict with language in military funding package may explain reversal
The U.S. Air Force has issued a “directive to cease the use of ‘preferred pronouns’ (he/him, she/her, or they/them) to identify one’s gender identity in professional communications,” according to a report published in the Hill on Wednesday.
The rule, which applies to both airmen and civilian employees, was first adopted on Feb. 4 pursuant to President Donald Trump’s anti-transgender executive order called, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”
Days after the administration’s issuance of that order on the first day of the president’s second term, the Office of Personnel Management instructed agencies across the whole of the federal government to remove pronouns from email signatures and enforce the policy barring employees from using them.
Additionally, on Jan. 27 Trump published an order barring trans people from joining the U.S. Armed Forces, indicating that those who are currently in serving would be separated from the military. The Pentagon is fending off legal challenges to the ban in federal courts.
Particularly given the extent of the new administration’s efforts to restrict the rights of trans Americans and push them out of public life, the Air Force’s reversal of the pronoun guidance was surprising.
According to reporting in Military.com, the move might have come because officials concluded the rule was in conflict with language in the military appropriations funding legislation passed by Congress in 2023.
The NDAA established that the defense secretary “may not require or prohibit a member of the armed forces or a civilian employee of the Department of Defense to identify the gender or personal pronouns of such member or employee in any official correspondence of the Department.”
Reenactment of 1965 gay rights protest at White House set for April 17
LGBTQ advocacy group joins Myanmar earthquake relief effort
Hungarian MPs amend constitution to ban public LGBTQ events
D.C. leaders must show up for LGBTQ+ communities
FreeState Justice: Transgender activist ‘hijacked’ Moore’s Transgender Day of Visibility event
WorldPride organizers may warn trans people from abroad not to attend event
It’s time for new leadership on the Maryland LGBTQIA+ Commission
White House does not ‘respond’ to reporters’ requests with pronouns included
INDIGNACIÓN: ¡El transfeminicidio de Sara Millerey en Colombia nos cuestiona como sociedad!
Argentina’s transgender community confronts ‘chaotic, desperate’ situation
-
District of Columbia5 days agoWorldPride organizers may warn trans people from abroad not to attend event
-
Opinions4 days agoIt’s time for new leadership on the Maryland LGBTQIA+ Commission
-
The White House3 days agoWhite House does not ‘respond’ to reporters’ requests with pronouns included
-
Noticias en Español4 days agoINDIGNACIÓN: ¡El transfeminicidio de Sara Millerey en Colombia nos cuestiona como sociedad!