Connect with us

News

State Dept. mum on next steps after India ruling

Spokesperson reiterates support for LGBT rights overseas

Published

on

Department of State, gay news, Washington Blade
Supreme Court of India, gay news, Washington Blade

Supreme Court of India (Photo by Legaleagle86; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)

State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki wouldn’t speculate Wednesday about how the U.S. might encourage India to repeal its law criminalizing homosexual acts when asked about the recent court ruling upholding the colonial-era law.

Under questioning from the Washington Blade, Psaki declined to speculate about the potential options to encourage additional steps in India after she reiterated the Obama administration’s commitment to LGBT rights overseas.

“That’s a decision that the Indian government would make,” Psaki said. “We, obviously, don’t make decisions on behalf of other governments and their legislation. So, I expressed our deep concern about any efforts around the world to not recognize that LGBT rights are human rights and that’s a message we’ll continue to make.”

Earlier in the day, the India Supreme CourtĀ overturned a lower court ruling from 2009 that decriminalized the same-sex relations between two men, which was previously illegal under a colonial-era law known asĀ section 377. With the law back in place, individuals found guilty of “unnatural offenses” in the world’s second most populous country could face 10 years in prison.

Psaki said the State Department is “aware of” the decision in response to a first question about the ruling from a reporter during her daily news briefing,

But Psaki responded to the decision initially only by speaking broadly about the Obama administration’s support for LGBT rights, referencing a statement from Secretary of State John Kerry on Human Rights Day.

“We oppose any action that criminalizes consensual same-sex conduct between adults,” Psaki said. “LGBT rights are human rights. That’s something you heard Secretary Kerry say and Secretary Clinton say before him. And we call on all governments to advance equality for LGBT individuals around the world.”

It took questioning from another reporter for Psaki to clarify that U.S. concern with anti-sodomy laws “whether it’s India, or any other country” applies to the recent ruling.

“Any action that criminalizes consensual same-sex conduct between adults, that doesn’t recognize that fundamental freedoms include their right to sexual orientation, those are issues that we certainly would be concerned about as we are here,” Psaki said.

Asked whether the State Department was planning to reach out to the Indian government about the issue, Psaki wouldn’t make any specific predictions, but said human rights issues come up in conversations.

“Well, we consistently bring up human rights issues with most countries we meet with,” Psaki said.Ā “I don’t have any specific recent call or meeting to read out for all of you, but certainly that’s something we’re happy to express publicly and privately.”

Top U.S. officials just recently had the opportunity to speak with Indian officials.

As part of her initial response speaking generally about news related to India, Psaki said Secretary of State John Kerry and other high-ranking State Department officials met on Tuesday withĀ Indian Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh and agreed to an expansion of strategic partnerships.

“The United States and India agreed … to strengthen new U.S.-India cooperation on training U.S. peacekeepers to develop support for the department’s own peace operations initiative,” she said. “The United States also accepted India’s invitation to serve as a partner country for India’s technology summit and expo in New Delhi in the fall of 2014, further intensifying our broad scientific cooperation.”

Asked whether the Supreme Court decision came up during this discussion, Psaki said she believes it happened before the ruling was handed down. When another reporter mentioned other related meetings were taking place today, Psaki said she’d have to check to verify that and whether any discussions about the ruling took place.

“I don’t have any other comment for you on the Supreme Court case than what I just offered or any other expectations of steps,” Psaki said. “That’s obviously steps the Indian government would take.”

After a reporter pointed out that the State Department would make threats aimed at Ukraine after it used violence to stop peaceful protests, but that it won’t take similar action in the India case, Psaki said the situations were different.

“Obviously, the events in Ukraine, we expressed our deep concern and the reasons why,” Psaki said. “And, as you know, we don’t group every country and everything that happens into the same category. Every circumstance is different.”

A transcript of the exchange follows:

Department of State, gay news, Washington Blade

U.S. Department of State (Photo public domain)

QUESTION:Ā Thank you. You must have seen the Indian Supreme Court decision criminalizing homosexuality, which has sent shockwaves in the global LGBT community. And itā€™s more important, because only yesterday, Secretary Kerry issued a statement on Human Rights Day, and in which he mentioned LGBT. So what is the reaction that ā€“ and especially because the Indian foreign secretary is in town?

MS. PSAKI:Ā Mm-hmm. Well, we, of course, are aware of the Supreme Court decision. The United States places great importance on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms of all people. And as you saw and as you referenced in the Secretaryā€™s statement yesterday, that includes lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons around the world. We oppose any action that criminalizes consensual same-sex conduct between adults. LGBT rights are human rights. Thatā€™s something youā€™ve heard Secretary Kerry say, I believe Secretary Clinton say before him, and we call on all governments to advance equality for LGBT individuals around the world.

I know you asked me about the visit of the foreign secretary. Iā€™m happy to give a readout of that, if thatā€™s helpful as well. Secretary Kerry and Deputy Secretary Burns met yesterday with Indian Foreign Secretary Singh to discuss ways to deepen the U.S.-India Strategic Partnership and consult on regional issues. Foreign Secretary Singh also met with Acting Under Secretary Rose Gottemoeller, Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia Nisha Biswal, and other senior officials.

The United States and India agree to joint principles to strengthen India-U.S. cooperation on training UN peacekeepers, developed with support from the Departmentā€™s Global Peace Operations Initiative. The United States also accepted Indiaā€™s invitation to serve as a partner country for Indiaā€™s technology summit and expo in New Delhi in the fall of 2014, further intensifying our broad scientific cooperation.

QUESTION:Ā Thank you. Are you planning to reach out to the Indian Government to express your ā€“ directly about what needs to be done? Because if you see the atmosphere there, the political parties, the pressure, and ā€“ it is not just a vague Supreme Court decision.

MS. PSAKI:Ā Well, we have ā€“ we consistently bring up human rights issues with most countries we meet with, and I donā€™t have any specific recent call or meeting to read out for all of you, but certainly, thatā€™s something weā€™re happy to express publicly and privately as needed.

QUESTION:Ā Back on India —

QUESTION:Ā Well, in that meeting between the top diplomat for the Administration and his Deputy and the Indian foreign secretary, this didnā€™t come up?

MS. PSAKI:Ā That happened yesterday. I donā€™t ā€“ Iā€™m not aware of when ā€“ I believe this decision may have been today, the Supreme Court decision.

QUESTION:Ā But she still has a meeting today too in the building.

MS. PSAKI:Ā Hmm?

QUESTION:Ā She had a meeting today also. Was this issue brought up with her?

MS. PSAKI:Ā Today? With ā€“ who was the meeting with today?

QUESTION:Ā I donā€™t know, but I think she had —

QUESTION:Ā But sheā€™s in town.

QUESTION:Ā — some meetings here today also.

MS. PSAKI:Ā I have to check on that. I was under the impression that most of the meetings were yesterday, but Iā€™m happy to check, and if there were meetings today, we can check if this issue came up.

QUESTION:Ā All right. And then —

QUESTION:Ā Yeah, but the question —

QUESTION:Ā — in the initial ā€“ in your initial response, I didnā€™t hear you actually give any reaction to what the decision actually was. Iā€™m presuming that you think itā€™s a bad ruling by the Supreme Court, but I didnā€™t hear you say that.

MS. PSAKI:Ā Well, we —

QUESTION:Ā Can you go ahead ā€“ can you say that?

MS. PSAKI:Ā I believe by saying we oppose any action that criminalizes consensual same-sex conduct between adults in general around the world, I think I was pretty clear about what our view is.

QUESTION:Ā So what do you think about the ā€“ specifically about the Indian Supreme Court decision?

MS. PSAKI:Ā I think —

QUESTION:Ā Iā€™m looking for something thatā€™s got the word ā€œIndiaā€ in the answer, other than just —

MS. PSAKI:Ā Matt, Iā€™m not sure I have much more to add other than to convey that any legislation around the world, whether itā€™s India or any other country that criminalizes —

QUESTION:Ā But this isnā€™t legislation.

MS. PSAKI:Ā — Iā€™m sorry ā€“ any action that criminalizes consensual same-sex conduct between adults that doesnā€™t recognize that fundamental freedoms of people include their right to sexual orientation ā€“ those are issues that we certainly would be concerned about, as we are here.

QUESTION:Ā So you are expressing concern about the Supreme Court decision in India on this case?

MS. PSAKI:Ā Correct.

QUESTION:Ā Okay.

MS. PSAKI:Ā Does the supreme —

QUESTION:Ā Clarify it one more time.

MS. PSAKI:Ā Sure.

QUESTION:Ā You are opposed to the Supreme Court decision and you are going to raise this issue with the Indian Government, right?

MS. PSAKI:Ā I think I expressed our concern about any cases along these lines. We are in regular touch about these issues and others with India. I donā€™t have anything specific to read out for you in terms of future meetings or conversations about this.

QUESTION:Ā Yeah. Does the United States expect India to ā€“ the parliament ā€“ with respect to the parliament, does it expect the Indian parliament to repeal that law?

MS. PSAKI:Ā I donā€™t have any other comment for you on the Supreme Court case than what Iā€™ve just offered or any other expectation of steps. Thatā€™s obviously steps the Indian Government would take.

QUESTION:Ā Is there any actions at all the Supreme Court ā€“ is there any options at all the State Department is examining to encourage India to repeal that law?

MS. PSAKI:Ā Thatā€™s a decision that the Indian Government would make. We obviously donā€™t make decisions on behalf of other governments and their legislation. So I expressed our deep concern about any efforts around the world to not recognize that LGBT rights are human rights, and thatā€™s a message weā€™ll continue to convey.

QUESTION:Ā Well, the only problem with that is that youā€™re threatening sanctions on Ukraine, or saying that theyā€™re a possibility because theyā€™re violating peopleā€™s human rights and not listening to the ā€“ not listening to the people. And yet here with India, itā€™s not even clear whether this has ā€“ has come up, will come up, or will ever come up with the Indian Government. And in fact, the meeting ā€“ the readout that you gave of the meetings yesterday said that everything with India is full speed ahead, and weā€™re intensifying our relationship, and —

MS. PSAKI:Ā Those meetings were yesterday. I think I expressed pretty clearly our opposition to this. In terms of what steps would be taken by a government on a Supreme Court case, thatā€™s not something I would have a comment on. Obviously, the events in Ukraine weā€™ve expressed our deep concern about, and the reasons why. And as you know, we donā€™t group every country and everything that happens into the same category. Every circumstance is different.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Politics

HRC slams White House over position opposing gender affirming surgeries for minors

ā€˜Biden administration is flat wrong on thisā€™

Published

on

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson issued a strong rebuke on Tuesday of the Biden-Harris administration’s position opposing gender affirming surgeries for minors.

The New York Times reported on June 28 that the White House, which broadly supports making medical interventions available for transgender youth, had expressed opposition to surgeries for patients under 18, having previously declined to take a specific position on the question.

ā€œHealth care decisions for young people belong between a patient, their family, and their health care provider. Trans youth are no exception,” Robinson responded. 

ā€œThe Biden administration is flat wrong on this. Itā€™s wrong on the science and wrong on the substance. Itā€™s also inconsistent with other steps the administration has taken to support transgender youth. The Biden administration, and every elected official, need to leave these decisions to families, doctors and patientsā€”where they belong,” she added. “Although transgender young people make up an extremely small percentage of youth in this country, the care they receive is based on decades of clinical research and is backed by every major medical association in the U.S. representing over 1.3 million doctors.”

Robinson said the “administration has committed to fight any ban on healthcare for transgender youth and must continue this without hesitationā€”the entire community is watching.” 

ā€œNo parent should ever be put in the position where they and their doctor agree on one course of action, supported by the overwhelming majority of medical experts, but the government forbids it,ā€ she added.

HRC is a prominent backer of Biden’s 2024 reelection campaign, having pledged $15 million to support efforts in six battleground states. The organization has a strong relationship with the White House, with the president and first lady headlining last year’s National Dinner.

A White House spokesperson declined to respond to Robinson’s statement.

Campaign for Southern Equality President Allison Scott also issued a statement.

ā€œThis is a cowardly statement from an administration that promised to support transgender people. It is a troubling concession to the right-wing assault on transgender Americans, falling for their false narratives about surgical care and betraying a commitment to equality and trust in the medical community,ā€ said Scott.

ā€œLetā€™s be very, very clear: Government has no business inserting itself into private medical decisions that should be exclusively between patients, their providers, and the patientsā€™ parent or guardian,” Scott added.

“It is dangerous to begin endorsing categorical bans or limits on healthcare, and there is no justification for restricting transgender youthā€™s access to the very same care that many cisgender youth receive every year ā€” thatā€™s literally the definition of discrimination,” Scott concluded. “We demand the Biden administration retract this thoughtless statement and work to undo its damage.ā€ 

Continue Reading

Virginia

Parades, community events held to mark Pride Month in Va.

Upwards of 30,000 people attended PrideFest in Norfolk on June 22

Published

on

Shi-Queeta-Lee at Arlington Pride in Arlington, Va., on June 29, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Activists across Virginia last month held a series of events to mark Pride Month.

Hampton Roads Pride, a volunteer-run organization founded in 1997, held 37 different Pride events throughout the region in June. 

Their biggest event, PrideFest, which is part of their larger three day event, Pride Weekend, celebrated its 36th anniversary on June 22. Pride Weekend took place from June 21-23 and began with a block party at NorVa in Norfolk. 

PrideFest took place at Town Point Park, and an estimated 30,000 people attended. More than 70 venders participated, while Todrick Hall and Mariah Counts are among those who performed.

Another PrideFest event with a DJ in the afternoon and live music at night took place in Virginia Beach on June 23. Congressman Bobby Scott and U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) are among those who attended Pride events in Suffolk on June 30.

Norfolk Mayor Kenneth Alexander, along with members of the Norfolk and Virginia Beach City Councils, also attended the Pride events in their respective cities. Jamar Walker, the first openly gay federal judge in Virginia, also took part.

ā€œYou know people all throughout Pride Month, at all of our various events, tell me all kinds of stories about their own experiences and the past of this community … and some of our older folks especially, remember when we couldn’t have this,ā€ Hampton Roads Pride President Jeff Ryder told the Washington Blade on Monday during a telephone interview.

ā€œIt was a great year,ā€ he added. “It was a big achievement for us to have unique celebrations in each of our seven communities. Each of these cities is so different from one another, but to be able to create a Pride celebration that’s unique in each of those places was really great, and I think really well received by folks who may not have felt represented previously. We’re always trying to do better, to embrace every aspect of our community, and take a big step forward there this year.ā€

State Dels. Adele McClure (D-Arlington County) and Alfonso Lopez (D-Arlington County) are among those who spoke at Arlington Pride that took place at Long Bridge Park on June 29. The Fredericksburg Pride march and festival took place the same day at Riverfront Park in Fredericksburg.

Republican Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin on June 10 hosted a Pride Month reception in Richmond. 

Youngkin in previous years has hosted Pride Month receptions, even though Equality Virginia and other advocacy groups have criticized him for supporting anti-LGBTQ bills.

The Republican governor in March signed a bill that codified marriage equality in Virginia. Youngkin last month vetoed a measure that would have expanded the definition of bullying in the state. 

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Concern over marriage equality in US grows two decades after first Mass. same-sex weddings

Gay and lesbian couples began to marry in Bay State in 2004

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

Two decades after Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage, a new study reveals both significant progress and ongoing challenges for married LGBTQ couples in the U.S., with a growing sense of insecurity about the future of their rights.

The Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law surveyed 484 married same-sex couples from all 50 states and D.C. The study, released Monday, marks the 20th anniversary of legal same-sex marriage in the U.S.

Researchers found that 93 percent of respondents cited love as a primary reason for marrying, with 75 percent also mentioning legal protections. Over 83 percent reported positive changes in their sense of security, and 74.6 percent noted improved life satisfaction since marrying.

However, the study also highlighted persistent discrimination and growing concerns about the future. About 11 percent of couples who had a wedding reported facing prejudice during the planning process.

Alarmingly, nearly 80 percent of respondents expressed concern about the potential overturning of the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. This anxiety has been exacerbated by initiatives like Project 2025, a conservative policy blueprint that some fear could roll back LGBTQ rights if implemented.

The possibility of a former President Donald Trump victory in the upcoming election has further intensified these concerns. Many respondents cited Trump’s previous U.S. Supreme Court appointments and his statements on LGBTQ issues as reasons for their apprehension. One participant stated, “The thought of another Trump presidency keeps me up at night. We’ve come so far, but it feels like our rights could be stripped away at any moment.”

The current political climate has 29 percent of respondents considering moving to another state, with 52.9 percent citing socio-political concerns as a primary reason. This reflects a growing sense of insecurity among LGBTQ couples about their rights and freedoms.

Brad Sears, founding executive director of the Williams Institute, noted, “The data clearly show that marriage equality has had a profound positive impact on same-sex couples and their families. However, it also reveals ongoing challenges and serious concerns about the future of these rights in light of current political trends and the upcoming election.”

Christy Mallory, legal director at the Williams Institute and lead author of the study, added, “This research provides crucial insights into the lived experiences of same-sex couples two decades after marriage equality began in the U.S. The high level of concern about potential loss of rights underscores the continued importance of legal protections and public support for LGBTQ+ equality.”

The study found that 30 percent of surveyed couples have children, with 58.1 percent of those parents reporting that marriage provided more stability for their families. However, many of these families now worry about the security of their legal status in the face of potential policy changes and shifting political landscapes.

As the nation reflects on two decades of marriage equality, the study underscores both the transformative power of legal recognition and the ongoing need for vigilance in protecting LGBTQ+ rights. The findings highlight the complex reality faced by same-sex couples in America today: Celebrating hard-won progress while grappling with uncertainty about the future, particularly in light of upcoming political events and potential shifts in leadership.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular