• OUT: Fresh off presenting at the Golden Globe Awards last night, Heated Rivalry star Connor Storrie (above) makes his late-night talk show debut tonight on Late Night with Seth Meyers on NBC.
• Queerty: Hit the link for the best — and gayest — moments from last night’s Golden Globe Awards including the Heated Rivalry boys, Wanda Sykes accepting transphobe Ricky Gervais’s award by thanking the trans community, and all the luxe looks from the red carpet. Continue reading “Connor Storrie On ‘Late Night With Seth Meyers’ + More News”
In this week’s podcast: • More LGBTQ candidates won elections this year than ever before • A US Supreme Court decision upholds high school transgender students’ rights • Switzerland is poised to (finally) legalize same-sex marriage • Adoptions by same-sex couples in the UK has increased for the 3rd year in a row • Isolated Asian country of Bhutan legalizes same-sex relations • Emmy/Grammy winner Billy Porter has been announced to help usher in the New Year • A coming out Christmas song by country artist and LGBTQ ally Aaron LaCombe goes viral ‘Uncle Carl (Came Out On Christmas)’ Click here to watch the video and head over to Aaron’s official website for more info about his music All that and more in this episode of The Randy Report
Aimee Stephens (image via GoFundMe) NBC News reports that Aimee Stephens, the transgender funeral home worker whose firing led to legal proceedings that ended up at the U.S. Supreme Court, died Tuesday of renal failure. She was 59. The ACLU, which has been handling her case, announced the news on Twitter. In 2013, Stephens came out as transgender to her employer and was subsequently fired. Stephens sued and her case, Stephens v. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Home, became part of a combined LGBTQ employment rights case. The high court heard oral arguments in October. In doing so, Stephens became the first transgender person to have their case heard in the highest court of the land.
A ruling from SCOTUS could be handed down any day now which could affect the employment rights of transgender people across the entire U.S. Years of kidney disease took its toll on Stephens and she required lengthy dialysis treatments. A GoFundMe campaign was launched last week to fundraise for her end-of-life costs.
With heavy hearts, we must share the news that Aimee Stephens, whose landmark case was the first case about the civil rights of transgender people to be heard by the Supreme Court, died today at her home in Detroit with her wife, Donna Stephens, at her side. She was 59.
Those who met Aimee Stephens know that her power was in her humbleness and sincerity. She has been an inspiration to millions of people around the world. We mourn with Aimee’s wife Donna, their daughter Elizabeth, and all of you. And we honor her life by fighting onward. pic.twitter.com/lzkmxviimv
The LGBTQ community owes Aimee Stephens our deepest gratitude for her bravery in standing up for the right of LGBTQ people to live as ourselves. We share our condolences with all of her friends & family, and especially her wife, Donna Stephens. https://t.co/wbMJpMgERu
“Somebody’s gotta do it” — Aimee Stephens, after bringing the first transgender rights case to SCOTUS Thank you for being the one to do it. We will continue your fight with your words and actions in our hearts. https://t.co/5AnnPZvk0V
— National Center for Transgender Equality (@TransEquality) May 12, 2020
After allowing two recently passed bills to sit on his desk for more than a week, Idaho Governor Brad Little chose to sign two anti-transgender bills into law on the eve of International Transgender Day of Visibility.
The laws take particular aim at transgender youth. House Bill 509 prohibits transgender people from changing the gender listed on their birth certificate. The legislation is clearly a direct rebuttal to a federal court’s decision to overturn Idaho’s previous ban on trans people amending their birth certificates.
Idaho Rep. Julianne Young (R) proposed a new ban against updating birth certificates claiming they are “historical” documents. House Bill 500 bans transgender student-athletes from participating in sports. This makes Idaho the first state in the country to pass legislation targeting transgender student-athletes.
Local news station KTVB reports the anti-LGBTQ group Family Policy Alliance of Idaho hailed the bills’ passage saying that the so-called “Fairness in Women’s Sports Act” protects athletic opportunities for girls “by ensuring biological males don’t play in girls’ high school and college sports.”
The new law also allows for female student-athletes gender to be “challenged” and forces the athlete to submit to medical exams to prove their gender.
“This bill asks doctors to perform procedures way outside of the standards of care,” pediatrician Jessica Duvall told Forbes. “Moreover, even if the tests were performed against medical society norms, more often than not they do not yield clear, easily interpreted results.”
The Human Rights Campaign issued a statement denouncing both laws said that both laws.
“We are living in an unprecedented global health crisis, with confirmed cases of COVID-19 increasing on a daily basis in Idaho, across the United States, and around the world, but Governor Brad Little and the Idaho legislature have decided to prioritize the demonization of transgender people,” said HRC President Alphonso David in a statement.
“This is unacceptable, and a gross misuse of taxpayer funds and trust. Idaho is leading the way in anti-transgender discrimination, and at a time when life is hard enough for everyone, Idaho’s elected leaders will be remembered for working to make their transgender residents’ lives even harder.”
Alex Schmider, GLAAD’s Associate Director of Transgender Representation, denounced the legislation as well writing, “Tonight, on the eve of Transgender Day of Visibility and while the United States is overwhelmed with a massive public health crisis, Idaho Governor Brad Little passed legislation targeting some of the most vulnerable members of the LGBTQ community — transgender children.
“Although medical experts, sport governing bodies, and Idaho’s major employers have spoken out against these two bills, Governor Little has instead sided with discrimination,” Schmider continued. “Now, more than ever, transgender people need to be supported, not subjected to state-sponsored discrimination and suffering.”
“Our country is facing an unprecedented health crisis, and Gov. Little and members of the Idaho Legislature have prioritized attacking transgender student-athletes with this discriminatory and unnecessary new law,” said Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, deputy executive director for the National Center for Transgender Equality.
“State leaders should focus on protecting public health and safety, not on attacking vulnerable youth who want to play on a team with their peers. With so much suffering right now, Idaho is making sure trans kids suffer more.”
Donny and Marie Osmond end their 11-year run at the Flamingo (photo: Denise Truscello) Some news items you might have missed: • Las Vegas: Donny & Marie Osmond concluded their iconic residency at Flamingo Las Vegas this past Saturday. The siblings’ 11-year residency began as a six-week engagement but was so well received that by popular demand, the residency was extended again and again. I was fortunate to see D&M several times over their amazing run. They were (and are) the picture of showmanship, talent, and professionalism. I never left the showroom anything less than impressed. #ToWhatsNext • Washington Blade: A transgender woman in Zimbabwe who filed a lawsuit over the abuse she suffered after her arrest for using a women’s restroom was awarded $400,000 on November 14 in a landmark ruling. • Daily Beast: Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace repeatedly confronted House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) over the Republican’s characterization of last week’s impeachment testimony, accusing the congressman of “very badly” misrepresenting the witnesses’ positions. • BBC: Australian rugby player Israel Folau, whose contract was canceled for repeated violations due to homophobic remarks on social media, blamed Australia’s bushfire crisis on the legalization of same-sex marriage. • OUT: A representative from the Salvation Army spoke to Matt Baume about how they are working to correct their anti-LGBTQ+ past. “Unfortunately, as a large organization, there have been isolated incidents that do not represent our values and service to all people who are in need.” • CBS News: Emails obtained by CBS News show San Diego billionaire Doug Manchester was asked by the RNC to donate half a million dollars as his confirmation in the Senate for ambassador to the Bahamas hung in the balance. You may recall Manchester made hefty donations to the Prop 8 campaign that erased marriage equality in California for a time. • Wise Words: Danny ‘Tree Man’ Jones offers this reminder – “Remember, it’s more about effort than the result :)” Hit the play button for the super-cute video message.
(Photo: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States/Public Domain) The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Tuesday for three cases considering whether federal civil rights laws protect LGBTQ people in the workplace. Two of the cases (Zarda v. Altitude Express and Bostock v. Clayton County) involve the firing of gay men and question whether anti-gay discrimination is illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The third case, EEOC v. Harris Funeral Homes, looks for resolution on whether anti-transgender discrimination is illegal under the law. The basic premise of the arguments hinges on whether discrimination based on “sex” – which Title VII prohibits – includes any discrimination involving sexual orientation. In other words, are employers allowed to discriminate against an employee based on the sex of the person they may date or marry? Conservative Justice Samuel Alito seemed to take the position that Congress in 1964 did not foresee covering sexual orientation or gender identity when passing Title VII. “You’re trying to change the meaning of ‘sex,’” said Alito according to the Associated Press. But Justice Elena Kagan suggested ‘sexual orientation’ is clearly a subset of sex discrimination in that a man who loves other men shouldn’t be treated differently by an employer than a woman who loves men. Here are the immediate reactions by some reporters who attended the oral arguments. Chris Johnson, of the Washington Blade, tweets that the ruling could come down, surprisingly, to Justice Neil Gorsuch who asked several questions “if sex is also in play” in cases regarding anti-LGBTQ discrimination. Johnson also notes that Chief Justice John Roberts, who has become something of the ‘moderate/swing vote’ on the court since the retirement of Anthony Kennedy, should not be counted on to rule in our favor.
Gorsuch, a textualist, asked many Qs about if “sex is also in play” in cases of anti-LGBT discrimination.
To be sure, Gorsuch also asked Qs about whether employers could keep sex-segregated bathrooms under LGBT-inclusive Title VII. — Chris Johnson (@chrisjohnson82) October 8, 2019
Gorsuch was the only justice U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco address during his time.
Perhaps Francisco sensed Gorsuch would come down on the side opposite of the anti-LGBT view of the Trump administration. — Chris Johnson (@chrisjohnson82) October 8, 2019
Justice Kavanaugh was very quiet during the Title VII arguments. It’s hard to tell what he’s thinking.
He asked only one technical legal question about the plain vs. ordinary meaning of the statute. — Chris Johnson (@chrisjohnson82) October 8, 2019
Justice Alito was obsessed with this hypothetical about an employer refusing to hire a job applicant after learning they’re gay, but not knowing their sex.
To him, that hypothetical shows anti-gay discrimination isn’t sex discrimination. — Chris Johnson (@chrisjohnson82) October 8, 2019
Legal blogger Amy Howe, formerly of SCOTUS Blog, also came away thinking Gorsuch may be the swing vote.
#SCOTUS finished with oral arguments on whether federal civil rights laws protect LGBT employees. Justices are closely divided; decision could hinge on Justice Neil Gorsuch, who acknowledged that question is “close” but also expressed concern about “massive social upheaval.”
Gorsuch claimed that interpreting Title VII to protect LGBTQ employees will cause “massive social upheaval.” He gestured toward open-mindedness on the textual argument but I think he will vote against LGBTQ rights.
Gorsuch seemed ambivalent, but said that “when a case is really close on the textualist evidence,” the court should refuse to work “a drastic change in this country.” I think he will cast an anti-LGBTQ vote and claim judicial modesty.
Kavanaugh asked one question: Whether the anti-LGBTQ side was “drawing a distinction between the literal and ordinary meaning” of discrimination “because of sex.” I’m not sure he has made up his mind. I suspect that when he does, he will side against LGBTQ rights.
Anyway I think the court will reject the argument for LGBTQ equality by a 5–4 vote, with the five conservatives claiming judicial modesty and saying Congress has to deal with this. But I wouldn’t say there’s NO cause for hope. It was not a wipeout for LGBTQ rights by any means.
The current U.S. Supreme Court (image via SupremeCourt.gov)
The United States Supreme Court has announced it will weigh in on whether existing civil rights laws prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
Currently, federal law bans discrimination in the workplace on the basis of religion, race, color, sex or national origin. While there is no specific federal law that protects LGBTQ individuals at work, advocates for the LGBTQ community say Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964prohibits being fired due to sexual orientation because that is a form of sex discrimination.
Lower courts have been split on the issue.
Of the cases that SCOTUS accepted for review Monday, two appeals courts ruled that the firings of a gay man and a transgender woman were illegal discrimination under Title VII, while a third case court ruled being fired for being gay does not fall under the purview of the civil rights law.
• A New York skydiving instructor, Donald Zarda, said he was fired after telling a female client she didn’t need to worry about being tethered together by confiding he is gay. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals found, in that case, that sexual orientation discrimination is a subset of sex discrimination.
• A transgender woman in Michigan, Aimee Stephens, sued her former employer, a funeral home, after she was fired in the aftermath of sharing that she is transgender. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals said transgender discrimination is banned due to Title VII.
• A Georgia man, Gerald Bostock, was dismissed by his employer after discovering his participation in a gay softball league (yes, that really happened), the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the 1964 civil rights law does not include sexual orientation.
Judge Diane Wood, of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, wrote in a 2017 ruling that “it is actually impossible to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation without discriminating on the basis of sex.”
But over in the 11th Circuit, Judge William Pryor pointed to lawmakers in his ruling saying that Congress “has not made sexual orientation a protected class.”
The high court will hear the cases during its next term that begins in October.
JoLynn Markison, a partner at the international law firm Dorsey & Whitney in its labor and employment practice and an advocate for the LGBTQ community, has been following this issue closely.
“This shift in the Supreme Court’s willingness to rule on the issue of whether Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination extends to gender identity and sexual orientation—which are quintessential expressions of “sex”—has been a long time coming,” Markison says.
Markison points to the newest member of the high court, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, as a fairly substantial ‘unknown’ in the upcoming deliberations in that he doesn’t have a clear judicial record on LGBTQ issues.
However, we do know his nomination was heavily supported by far-right, conservative groups like the Family Research Council, which has long advocated against LGBTQ equality.
That said, there’s another wild card player to watch here.
“Is there a swing vote on the Supreme Court? Or is this issue already as good as decided? The balance could lie with Chief Justice John Roberts, who notably did not join the conservative dissenters in Pavan v. Smith, in which the Supreme Court held that married same-sex couples are entitled to be listed on their children’s birth certificates the same as married heterosexual couples,” said Markison.
GLAAD, the world’s largest LGBTQ media advocacy organization, tweeted, “With more than 100 anti-LGBTQ attacks from the Trump Administration, this is exactly why we need to pass the #EqualityActnow and look toward explicitly protecting LGBTQ people with a constitutional amendment.”
With more than 100 anti-LGBTQ attacks from the Trump Administration, this is exactly why we need to pass the #EqualityAct now and look toward explicitly protecting LGBTQ people with a constitutional amendment. https://t.co/9AlJCy6qUz
Sarah Kate Ellis, CEO of GLAAD, followed that with her own tweet: “With Trump stacking the Supreme Court with anti-LGBTQ judges it’s clear that we need a constitutional amendment that protects LGBTQ people and all marginalized communities.”
With Trump stacking the Supreme Court with anti-LGBTQ judges it’s clear that we need a constitutional amendment that protects LGBTQ people and all marginalized communities. https://t.co/l5r00C97FB
New Jersey took positive steps forward on Tuesday when Gov. Phil Murphy signed new legislation into law providing important rights and protections for members of the LGBTQ community.
Murphy campaigned on a promise to protect and expand the rights of the LGBTQ community.
The first bill, SB478, allows transgender residents the ability to change birth and death certificates to reflect their gender identity. According to the new laws, people may choose to identify as male, female or undesignated.
Until now, transgender people had to undergo gender confirmation surgery and provide proof from their physician to amend their birth certificate.
According to Garden State Equality, the LGBTQ organization which helped draft the bill, New Jersey is the 17th state to enact a law dropping the surgery requirement for amending a birth certificate and only the fourth, after California, Oregon and Washington, to allow for a third gender option on the document.
Former Gov. Chris Christie had vetoed the bill twice while in office.
The second bill, SB493, allows a death certificate to reflect a person’s changed gender identity.
The third bill, SB705, provides for the creation of a Transgender Equality Task Force meant to identify barriers for transgender people in areas of housing, health care and criminal justice.
“Allowing vital records to match gender identity is an important step forward that will allow transgender individuals to control the disclosure of their transgender status,” said Gov. Murphy in a statement. “And by creating a Transgender Equality Task Force, New Jersey can ensure that all residents receive the protections they deserve. New Jersey will continue to stand with our LGBTQ residents in the continued pursuit of similar rights nationwide.”
According to a report by the Williams Institute at the University of California, there are approximately 30,100 transgender people living in New Jersey and 1.4 million trans people in the United States.
Voters in Anchorage, Alaska have rejected Proposition 1, an anti-transgender “bathroom bill” that would have forced folks to use bathrooms and locker rooms corresponding with their birth certificate gender.
No on Prop 1 took 53 percent of the votes with yes getting 46 percent.
This failure of the referendum to pass would mean that laws would retain the rights afforded to transgender people as passed in the Anchorage Assembly resolution of 2015.
