LQBTQIA2S and Sexuality History & Rights

Summary of H.R.5 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Equality Act

A case in which the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriage.

Anti-LGBTQ activists are spreading lies and misconceptions about what the Equality Act does and doesn’t do. Here are the facts.

Basic freedoms are missing in 29 states for LGBTQ+ Americans. Help Pass The Equality Act.

HRC provides you with information on how your elected officials have voted on issues of LGBTQ equality.

At issue in the case is the rights of a city to enforce its anti-discrimination policies in contracting against the rights of religious groups.

Once again, LGBTQ rights are up for judgment by the U.S. Supreme Court. The SCOTUS will be issuing rulings on anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people in employment. The cases involved are Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga., Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Join us for a timely discussion with some real legal eagles. Meet our expert panel: Felicia Medina is a queer, latina attorney and founding partner of Medina Orthwein LLP. Her practice focuses on individual and class action employment discrimination and harassment cases relating to race, gender, gender identity and expression, and sexual orientation, as well as wage and hour collective actions. She has been honored as a 2018 San Francisco Business Times OUTstanding Voices, 2017 Daily Journal Leading Labor and Employment Attorneys in California; a 2016 National LGBT Bar Association – Best LGBT Lawyer Under 40; a 2015 National Diversity Council Most Powerful and Influential Woman; and a Law360 2014 Minority Power Broker. Felicia received her law degree from Yale Law School in 2006. Kevin Love Hubbard is a partner at Medina Orthwein LLP. He has dedicated his career to civil rights and brings extensive experience in civil rights litigation to his firm, including individual and class employment discrimination and wage and hour claims, as well as constitutional claims involving police and prison misconduct. Prior to joining Medina Orthwein, Kevin represented nationwide classes and collectives of women with claims of gender discrimination, as well as individuals with cutting-edge employment claims, including claims of LGBTQ+ discrimination. Kevin graduated from Yale Law School in 2012. Imani Rupert-Gordon is the executive director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights. NCLR is a national legal organization committed to advancing the civil and human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their families through litigation, legislation, policy, and public education. Previously, she served as the executive director for Affinity Community Services, a social justice organization that works with the entire LGBTQ community with a focus on Black women. She also served as the director of the Broadway Youth Center, a division of Howard Brown Health in Chicago, which has served more than 1,500 LGBTQ youth experiencing homelessness and housing instability. In 2019, the Illinois Human Rights Commission presented her with its 2019 Activism Award. This year she was recognized by the Chicago Foundation for Women with a 2020 Impact Award. Rupert-Gordon received a Master’s degree from the University of Chicago School of Social Service Administration and a Bachelor’s degree in Sociology from the University of California, Santa Barbara Rev. Elena Rose Vera, a Filipina-Ashkenazi trans woman originally from rural Oregon, joined Trans Lifeline’s executive team in May 2018. A longtime organizer, educator and performing artist, she holds an M.Div. focused on social justice and community care work and was ordained as a minister by the Church for the Fellowship of All Peoples, a historic civil-rights church in San Francisco. Rev. Vera is proud to bring her deep commitment to love, support and liberation for trans people everywhere to her work with Trans Lifeline. Speakers: Felicia Medina Attorney; Founding Partner, Medina Orthwein LLP Kevin Love Hubbard Partner, Medina Orthwein LLP Imani Rupert-Gordon Executive Director, National Center for Lesbian Rights Rev. Elena Rose Vera M.Div., Executive Director, Trans Lifeline Michelle Meow Producer and Host, "The Michelle Meow Show," KBCW/KPIX-TV and Online Radio—Host -www.commonwealthclub.org/covid19support  -Subscribe for more Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/commonwealthclub -Upcoming events: https://www.commonwealthclub.org/events -Become a Member: https://www.commonwealthclub.org/membership -Donate Now: https://support.commonwealthclub.org/sslpage.aspx?pid=298 -Text DONATE to: 415-329-4231 -Watch & Listen https://www.commonwealthclub.org/watch-listen -Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thecommonwealthclub/ -Instagram https://www.instagram.com/cwclub/ -Twitter https://twitter.com/cwclub

The nation's highest court is hearing Obergefell v. Hodges, a case that examines if same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. Here's what you need to know about the case that could make gay marriage legal across the nation.

The definitive history of the marriage equality debate in the United States, praised by Library Journal "beautifully and accessibly written. . . . An essential work." As a legal scholar who first argued in the early 1990s for a right to gay marriage, William N. Eskridge Jr. has been on the front lines of the debate over same-sex marriage for decades. In this book, Eskridge and his coauthor, Christopher R. Riano, offer a panoramic and definitive history of America's marriage equality debate. The authors explore the deeply religious, rabidly political, frequently administrative, and pervasively constitutional features of the debate and consider all angles of its dramatic history. While giving a full account of the legal and political issues, the authors never lose sight of the personal stories of the people involved, or of the central place the right to marry holds in a person's ability to enjoy the dignity of full citizenship. This is not a triumphalist or one‑sided book but a thoughtful history of how the nation wrestled with an important question of moral and legal equality.

"Victory may sometimes look like a sudden revolution when, in truth, it rests on years of struggle. The June 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges is a sweeping victory for the freedom to marry, but it was one step in a long process. Love Unites Us is the history of activists' passion and persistence in the struggle for marriage rights for same-sex couples in the United States, told in the words of those who waged the battle. Launching the fight for the freedom to marry was neither an obvious nor an uncontested strategy. To many activists, achieving marriage equality seemed far-fetched, but the skeptics were proved wrong. Proactive arguments in favor of love, family, and commitment were more effective than arguments that focused on rights and the goal of equality at work. Telling the stories of people who loved and cared for one another, in sickness and in health, cut through the antigay noise and moved people-not without backlash and not overnight, but faster than most activists and observers had ever imagined. With compelling stories from leading attorneys and activists including Evan Wolfson, Mary L. Bonauto, Jon W. Davidson, and Paul M. Smith, Love Unites Us explains how gay and lesbian couples achieved the right to marry"--

"On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County, in a 6 to 3 decision with a majority opinion authored by conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. The decision was a surprise to many, if not most, observers, but as Jason Pierceson explores in this work, it was not completely unanticipated. The decision was grounded in a recent, but well-developed, shift in federal jurisprudence on the question of LGBTQ rights that occurred around 2000, with gender identity claims faring better in federal court after decades of skepticism. The most important precedent for these cases was a 1989 Supreme Court case that did not deal directly with LGBTQ rights: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. The Court ruled in Price Waterhouse that "sex stereotyping" is a form of discrimination under Title VII, a provision that prohibits discrimination in employment based upon sex. Anne Hopkins was a cisgender, heterosexual woman who was denied a promotion at her accounting firm for being too "masculine." At the time of the decision, and in the wake of the devastating decision for the LGBTQ movement in Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), the case was not viewed as creating a strong precedential foundation for LGBTQ rights claims, especially claims based upon sexual orientation. Even in the context of gender identity, the connection was not made to the emerging movement for transgender rights until a decade later. In the 2000s, however, federal courts were consistently applying the case to protect transgender individuals. While not the result of coordinated litigation, nor initially connected to the LGBTQ rights movement, Price Waterhouse has been one of the most important and powerful precedents in recent years, outside of the marriage equality cases. This book tells the story of how this "accidental" precedent evolved into such a crucial case for contemporary LGBTQ rights"--

The right of same-sex couples to marry provoked decades of intense conflict before it was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015. Yet some of the most divisive contests shaping the quest for marriage equality occurred not on the culture-war front lines but within the ranks of LGBTQ advocates. Nathaniel Frank tells the dramatic story of how an idea that once seemed unfathomable--and for many gays and lesbians undesirable--became a legal and moral right in just half a century. Awakening begins in the 1950s, when millions of gays and lesbians were afraid to come out, let alone fight for equal treatment. Across the social upheavals of the next two decades, a gay rights movement emerged with the rising awareness that same-sex love is equal to love everywhere. As movement leaders and ordinary gay people created new communities, alliances, and ideas, a tight-knit cadre of (mostly) gay and lesbian lawyers began to focus on legal recognition for same-sex couples, eventually creating a long-term strategy to win marriage rights in the courts. But first they had to win over members of their own LGBTQ community who declined to make marriage a priority, while reining in others who charged ahead heedless of their carefully laid plans, and often at odds with them. All the while, they had to fight against virulent antigay opponents and capture the American center by spreading the simple message that love is love--ultimately propelling the LGBTQ community, and America, immeasurably closer to justice.--

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett served for nearly three years on the board of private Christian schools that effectively barred admission to children of same-sex parents and made it plain that openly gay and lesbian teachers weren’t welcome in the classroom...

The Supreme Court’s recent decision on workplace protections for LGBTQ people has far-reaching implications for LGBTQ rights.

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, lashed out on Monday at the religious liberty implications of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision that cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide.

The idea that people of faith must be protected from discrimination—even when that means they themselves will discriminate against others—is gaining traction in the courts.

The LGBTQ community faces continued challenges from religious objectors, ranging from adoption and foster care to the rights of transgender people.

A foster care agency in Philadelphia that wants to turn away same-sex couples is putting anti-discrimination protections in jeopardy in the name of religious liberty.

The Supreme Court says the federal ban on discrimination "based on sex" applies to gay, lesbian and transgender employees.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) prohibits discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. On June 15, 2020, the U.S

Fear and outrage after two justices issue ‘appalling’ attack on 2015 decision enabling same-sex marriage

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by refusing to contract with Catholic Social Services.

Experts say the decision has implications for everything from housing to health care.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito on Monday used the case of a Kentucky clerk who refused to give gay couples marriage licenses to declare that religious liberty has been under siege since the Supreme Court in 2015 found a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

Post submitted by Lucas Acosta (he/him), former Deputy Director of Communications, PoliticsEarly reports are suggesting that Seventh Circuit U.S. Appeals Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett is the odds on favorite…

The Supreme Court is threatening to take away federal workplace protections for LGBTQ+ Americans.

U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects gay, lesbian, and transgender employees from discrimination based on sex. The ruling was 6-3, with Justice Neil Gorsuch, President Trump's first appointee to the court, writing the majority opinion.

The Court is set to consider whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 covers LGBTQ people

The Obama and Trump administrations have used their power to shape legal interpretations of "sex discrimination" in very different ways. Here's a rundown on what's changed for LGBTQ rights in the U.S.