Connect with us

Politics

Gloria Allred at the DNC: Harris is ‘more than ready for this job’

Trailblazing attorney spoke exclusively with the Washington Blade

Published

on

CHICAGO ā€” Vice President Kamala Harris, the 2024 Democratic nominee for president, is “more than ready for this job,” Gloria Allred told the Washington Blade on the sidelines of an LGBTQ caucus meeting during the Democratic National Convention on Monday.

“I met [Harris] when she was running for District Attorney of San Francisco, and she came to my office to seek my support, which, of course, I gave her,” Allred said. “I was extremely impressed with her at the time.”

“Usually I don’t make time to meet with political figures, frankly, because I’m so busy with the cases,” she said. “And I just, you know, can’t. But for some reason, I said, ‘Okay, I’ll meet her in my office,’ and I did, and I just had a feeling about her. And I’m so happy.”

Allred stressed that “we have to work to make it happen because it’s not going to happen just if we hope for it, we wish for it, we pray for it. We have to work for it.”

She also pointed out the dangers of Donald Trump’s candidacy for a second term in the White House, warning, “The Trump administration was just a disaster and a catastrophe for the country. And what they are doing now, Project 2025 in terms of pro-choice, in terms of gay and lesbian and transgender rights, is just a disaster.”

The former president, Allred said, “wants to distance himself from it” but “he can’t because so many of his employees, or former employees, I should say, from the administration, were involved in writing it ā€” and also, of course, he’s on video talking about how great it was and is.”

An attorney whose career has spanned five decades, Allred has argued some of the most high profile civil rights cases in America, with a particular focus on LGBTQ and women’s rights, often representing some of the most famous public figures, from politicians to entertainers.

“I just want to say, my law firm and I have been involved in advocating and litigating for gay, lesbian, and transgender rights since the late 1970s,” Allred said. “I know what going back means when they we say ‘we won’t go back,’ because I’ve been saying that at pro-choice marches and gay and lesbian protests since that time.”

“No one has ever given women our rights. We’ve always had to fight for women. And this is the same for gay, lesbian, transgender, you know, bisexual, the whole community ā€” no one’s giving us anything. No one ever gave us anything. We always have to fight to win it.”

At the DNC, “that’s what we’re doing here, is organizing, and I’m just really proud of the community that they’re here, educating people and helping to mobilize them,” Allred said. “Because we have to mobilize, we have to organize, and we have to help raise money to win.”

Trump, she said, has “billionaires supporting him,” and while Harris and the Democrats can win, Allred cautioned “we have to be really committed. There are not many days left to do it.”

“We have a real commitment, and we know how much more this election can make in terms of a difference for the community and equal rights for all,” Allred added.

Allred’s precedent-setting LGBTQ rights cases

Gloria Allred, center, with California marriage equality plaintiffs Robin Tyler and Diane Olson in 2013. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Allred told the Blade about several landmark cases that she litigated on behalf of LGBTQ clients, going back several decades, including one involving two gay men who attended their high school reunion in the 1980s and were told their photo would not be published in the book because “the publisher felt it was against his religion to publish a photo of two gay men together.”

“We sued them, and after 16 years of litigating it all the way up to the California Court of Appeals, we won,” Allred said. The matter earned media attention, as the publisher “took out advertisements in the newspapers” arguing that “he had a right of free speech and religious expression to not publish” the photo.

“Well, we won the case in California decades ago,” she said.

Allred noted that apart from the role of the California Unruh Civil Rights Act in her case, analogous legal disputes were at issue in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018).

California was, and is, at the vanguard of LGBTQ civil rights movements. So was, and is, Allred and her firm, Allred, Maroko & Goldberg. “We did the right to marry case,” she said, “I did AIDS discrimination cases that we also won up in the California Court of Appeals” which ruled that “you can’t discriminate against someone” because of their HIV/AIDS status.

“We represented Robin Tyler and Diane Olson and Reverend Troy Perry and Phillip Ray De Blieck, his partner, the four of them in our right to marry case in California,” Allred said. “And we were the first in the state to challenge the family code law that essentially said that two people of the same sex could not marry. We challenged that. We went all the way to the California Supreme Court and we won.”

Here, too, Allred’s work crossed paths with Harris’s efforts in the public sector, aided by other allies like California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) who was, during this time, mayor of San Francisco.

“Because we were the first, Robin and Diane were the first, to be allowed to marry in LA County, a day before everyone else, we know that Newsom ā€” actually, the same day that we announced we’re challenging the constitutionality of the law [he] started marrying gay and lesbian couples.”

The attorney ā€” who in 2022 was awarded the highest honor of the LGBTQ+ Lawyers Association of Los Angeles ā€” noted her and her firm’s ongoing work on behalf of transgender clients, which she considers “part of what we think should be always a teaching moment for what happens so that if people see the injustice and the unfairness, then they will join with us in wanting to right the wrongs.”

Allred highlighted another landmark case in the 1980s in which she represented “two lesbian life partners, wonderful women, businesswomen, very articulate” who were “not going to be in the closet” about their relationship when they celebrated Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday at Papa Choux, a fine dining establishment in Los Angeles.

“One was Latina, the other one was African American,” she said. “They were a couple, and they made a reservation for the romantic booths, which were like a few steps up from the main restaurant” with “sheer curtains, and violinists [who] came in to play” by the tables.

The couple was told that they were welcome to sit elsewhere but “two people of the same sex can’t sit in this romantic section” as a matter of restaurant policy and also per a city ordinance. “They weren’t kissing, they weren’t hugging, they weren’t even holding hands,” Allred said, and they did not want to move. As they would later say publicly, “‘we thought to ourselves, what would Martin Luther King Jr. want us to do? And we decided he would want us to call Gloria Allred.'”

“They came to us,” she said, and “we took the case. We had to decide, is this sexual orientation? Is it sex discrimination? Is it important? Or is it not important? Is it ridiculous? And then we decided, if you think that Rosa Parks sitting in the back of the bus was important, even though the bus would still get there, but she was treated in a way that was not respectful of her right to be treated in a dignified, respectful way, so this is the same thing.”

“So we fought at the lower court,” Allred said. “The trial court said, the judge said, ‘I want to go see the restaurant,’ which was not necessary. It’s a legal issue. But he did, and then he ruled against us, and we went up to the Court of Appeals, and we won, and they reversed, and we set a legal precedent that we’re able to cite in other cases and other attorneys were able to cite that you can’t discriminate against people because they’re lesbian or gay or of the same sex.”

That was 1984. “It’s still a legal precedent in California,” Allred added.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Congress

House Republicans advance two anti-trans education bills

Congresswoman Jahana Hayes, LGBTQ groups slammed the effort

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) chair of the House Education and Workforce Committee (Photo public domain)

Republicans members of the House Education and Workforce Committee advanced two anti-transgender bills on Wednesday, one that would forcibly out students in public elementary and middle schools to their parents and a second covering grades K-12 that critics have dubbed a “don’t say trans” bill.

More specifically, under the PROTECT Kids Act, changes to “a minorā€™s gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form or sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms” could not be made without parental consent, while the Say No to Indoctrination Act would prohibit schools from teaching or advancing “gender ideology” as defined by President Donald Trump’s anti-trans Jan. 20 executive order, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.

U.S. Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.), who was named national teacher of the year before her election to Congress, rose to speak out against the bills during the committee’s convening on Wednesday.

“Curriculum does not include teaching students to be something else. Curriculum does not include indoctrinating students to identify as gay or LGBTQ or other or anything. But federal law mandates that all students have civil rights protections,” she said.

The congresswoman continued, “I don’t really understand what the members of this committee think happens in schools, but my question is, what do we do with these children? The children who you are saying, on this committee, don’t exist, the children who are struggling with their identity and often times confide in their teachers and ask for support and help.”

“What we’re doing in this committee is focusing on a small population of students who are at a point in their life where they are struggling and school may, for many of them, feel like the only safe place or the only place where they can get support, or the only place where they can speak to a counselor,” Hayes said.

“And as a teacher, I don’t care if it was just one student that I had to reassure that they were important and they were valued and they belonged here,” she said. “I’m going to do it, and anyone who has dedicated their life to this profession will do the same. So the idea that you all feel okay with arbitrarily erasing, disappearing people, making them think that they they don’t exist, or they don’t have a place in schools, or the curriculum should not include them, or whatever they’re feeling should not be valued, considered, Incorporated, is just wrong.”

“So I will not be supporting this piece of legislation, as if that was not already evident, and I will be using all of my time, my agency, my energy, my advocacy, to ensure that every student,” Hayes said, “feels valued, respected, important and included in the work that I engage in on this committee.”

The congresswoman concluded, “when you are in a classroom and you are a teacher, and that door closes and a student falls in your arms and says to you, I am struggling, and I can’t go home with this information, and I need Help, you have a moral responsibility to help that child or you are in the wrong profession. I yield back.”

The Congressional Equality Caucus slammed the bills in an emailed statement from the chair, U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), who noted that the legislation comes as “Donald Trump is illegally trying to dismantle the Department of Education and pass tax cuts for billionaires.”

“Extreme Republicans in Congress are trying to distract Americans by advancing cruel, anti-trans legislation,ā€ said the congressman, who is gay. ā€œSchool districts, teachers, and staff best understand how to draft age-appropriate, inclusive curriculums and craft policies that both respect the important role parents play in childrenā€™s education and the importance of studentsā€™ safety.”

“Yet, Republicansā€™ Donā€™t Say Trans Act would cut critical funding for schools if their teachers teach lessons or include materials that simply acknowledge the reality of trans peoplesā€™ existence,” Takano added. “Republicansā€™ forced outing bill would put kids in danger by requiring schools that want to take certain steps to affirm a transgender studentā€™s identity to forcibly out them to their parents ā€” even if the school knows this will put the studentā€™s safety at risk.”

The caucus also slammed the bills in a series of posts on X.

The Human Rights Campaign also issued a statement on Wednesday by the organization’s communications director, Laurel Powell:

ā€œInstead of putting our dangerous President in check and tackling the American economyā€™s free fall, House Republicans showed where their priorities lie ā€” giving airtime to junk science and trying to pass more anti-LGBTQ+ legislation.

“Forcing teachers to ā€˜outā€™ trans youth rather than supporting them in coming out to their families and demanding that schools ignore the trans students who sit in their classrooms is a craven attempt to distract people from economic disaster by vilifying children.

“Even as they fire people whose jobs were to make sure schools have the resources they need, the Trump administration and their allies in Congress continue to attack vulnerable young people to score points with the far right.ā€

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump’s battle with Maine over trans policies escalates

State has filed a lawsuit, federal government has cut funding and launched investigations

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Balde photo by Michael Key)

A months-long standoff between between President Donald Trump and Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) continued to escalate this week with a lawsuit targeting the administration on Monday and cuts to federal grants to the state on Tuesday.

The conflict kicked off on Feb. 21 at the White House, where the president threatened Mills with retaliation after she declined to say that her state would not comply with his executive order barring transgender athletes from competing in school sports. The governor and other officials have said the policy is in conflict with provisions of the Maine Human Rights Act, while the president argued his executive action supersedes state law.

While the heated exchange between the two concluded with each party vowing to see the other in court, developments in the time since suggest that Trump and Mills are likely to square off over legal questions far broader than whether the White House can prohibit trans girls in a blue state from joining the field hockey team.

In a complaint filed on Monday, Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey argued U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins had unlawfully frozen funding for “certain administrative and technological functions” in schools in his state after concluding, in the absence of a formal investigation, that some of their programs violated Title IX rules. A letter last week from Rollins notifying Mills of the USDA’s decision warned that it was “only the beginning.”

Then on Tuesday, the Maine Department of Corrections said the Justice Department had cancelled several grants, which according to the Maine Morning Star would have supported “drug treatment for adults in reentry, programs that foster engagement between incarcerated parents and their children, and resources for corrections agencies to improve post-release supervision in order to prevent recidivism and reduce crime.” U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said during an interview that the move came in response to the state’s incarceration of a transwoman in a women’s prison.

One of Trump’s day-one executive actions targeting trans rights included a provision directing the AG and the Homeland Security secretary to ensure that women’s prisons and detention centers do not detain or house “males” or trans women, though here and elsewhere the administration deliberately does not make the distinction ā€” and in Section 2 of the order, establishes that the policy of the federal government will be to treat gender as a binary that is fixed at birth, a narrow definition that denies the biological reality that people can be intersex (meaning their sex characteristics cannot be clearly distinguished as male or female) while others, like trans individuals, may experience incongruity between their gender and birth sex.

Leading up to this week, other major developments following the Feb. 21 White House confrontation between Trump and Maine’s Democratic governor include:

  • A probe in late March by the U.S. Department of Education into whether policies in Maine schools that protect the privacy of students by prohibiting disclosures to parents about the sexual orientation or gender identity of their kids may violate federal law,
  • Trump’s demand for an apology from Mills on her refusal to do so, both in late March,
  • DOE’s determination in late March that schools in the state were violating Title IX by allowing trans women and girls to compete in sports, which came after the Trump administration reversed that portion of the Title IX guidance issued under former President Joe Biden,
  • An announcement in mid-March by the the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights that the Maine Principalsā€™ Association and Greely High School violated Title IX by allowing trans athletes to compete in sports,
  • The USDA’s decision in early March to hold up funding for universities in the University of Maine system pending the conclusion of the agency’s probe into possible violations of Title IX and Title VI, which was subsequently reinstated after a couple of weeks,
  • The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s withdrawal of funding in early March for the University of Maine’s Maine Sea Grant program, which was followed less than a week later with the U.S. Department of Commerce ‘s announcement that it would be renegotiated, and
  • HHS’s determination in late February that the Maine Department of Education violated Title IX, a conclusion reached just four days after an investigation was opened and without any interviews, data requests or negotiations.
Continue Reading

Congress

Chris Pappas launches Senate bid in N.H.

Video references ‘political extremists who want to take rights away’

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Gay U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) launched his bid for the seat held by retiring U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) with a video posted to X Thursday morning and kickoff event planned for the evening in his hometown of Manchester, N.H.

ā€œIā€™m running for Senate because our economy, our democracy, and our way of life are on the line, and New Hampshire deserves a senator who is grounded in the people, places, and values of this state,ā€Ā he said in a press release.Ā ā€œGranite Staters know my record of taking on the big fights and looking out for them ā€” pushing tax cuts for working families and small businesses, taking on predatory companies and corporate polluters, and standing up to Big Pharma to lower drug costs.”

Pappas’s statement continued, “Like Sen. Shaheen, Iā€™ll always put New Hampshire first. You can count on me to lead the charge to confront this administration, self-dealing billionaires, and extreme politicians who threaten our future and our ability to get things done for New Hampshire.ā€

In his video, the fourth-term congressman pledged to rein in the power of big corporations, and he addressed “veterans, parents, small business owners,” and the “people who have done everything right” but are “asking ‘why does it feel like the system is rigged?'”

Referencing concerns with the Republican administration and GOP majorities in Congress, he said, “You think about the social security office that’s gonna be closed in Littleton, drastic cuts to Medicaid, all in the name of giving big tax breaks to billionaires like Elon Musk.”

Pappas also seemed to allude to anti-LGBTQ moves by the White House and congressional Republicans, promising to stand up to “political extremists who want to take rights away.” The ad wrapped with a shot of the congressman with his husband Vann Bentley. “We will get our country back on track. Stronger, fairer, freer, working for everyone.”

Freshman U.S. Rep. Maggie Goodlander (D-N.H.) is also considering a run for Shaheen’s seat while former U.S. Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and former New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu are mulling campaigns.

Pappas was endorsed by the LGBTQ Victory Fund, whose newly seated CEO Evan Low released a statement:

ā€œRep. Chris Pappas has a long and storied history of serving New Hampshire, and LGBTQ+ Victory Fund has been right by his side since he ran for state office 23 years ago. He has a track record of taking on big fights for his constituents and has proven that he can win tough races, outperform expectations, and flip key Granite State seats. Whether its strengthening the economy, protecting bodily autonomy or taking on price gougers, Chris will continue to be an important voice that looks out for the people of New Hampshire.

ā€œWe need Chrisā€™s pro-equality voice in the Senate, where right now we only have one LGBTQ+ member. He will be a strong fighter against anti-equality forces in the current administration and extreme politicians looking to erase our rights and existence.

ā€œHis presence in the Senate will be critical to retake the majority and ensure that Granite State voters wonā€™t get a raw deal. Chris deeply understands New Hampshire, and his record shows that he is laser-focused on getting things done. We are thrilled to endorse Chris Pappas for a history-making place as the first out LGBTQ+ man to serve in the Senate.ā€

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular