Social Movements & the Law

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.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivers remarks on International Human Rights Day in Geneva, Switzerland on December 6, 2011. [Go to http://video.state.gov for more video and text transcript.]

The American Bar Association's Commission on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI), as one of the four ABA Goal III Entities, leads the Association's commitment to diversity, inclusion and full and equal participation by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons in the Association, legal profession, and society.

As one of his first actions in office, President Joe Biden has issued an executive order ensuring that last year’s US Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County is applied immediately and efficiently by all federal agencies that enforce any laws that prohibit sex discrimination. In Bostock, the Court ruled that employees are protected against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:    Section 1.  Policy.  It is the policy of my Administration that all students should be guaranteed an educational environment free from discrimination on the basis of sex, including…

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1.  Policy.  Every person should be treated with respect and dignity and should be able to live without fear, no matter who they are or whom they love.  Children should…

In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, No. 17-1618 (S. Ct.

Five years ago today in Orlando in the middle of Pride Month, our nation suffered the deadliest attack affecting the LGBTQ+ community in American history, and at the time, the deadliest mass shooting by a single gunman. Within minutes, the Pulse nightclub that had long been a place of acceptance and joy turned into a…

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES This memorandum reaffirms and supplements the principles established in the Presidential Memorandum of December 6, 2011 (International Initiatives to Advance the Human Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Persons).  That memorandum, for the first time, directed executive departments and agencies (agencies) engaged abroad to ensure…

Trump’s record of action against transgender people Since the day President Trump took office, his administration has waged a nonstop onslaught against the rights of LGBTQ people. In order to keep the administration accountable for its policies and help transgender people keep track of actions taken against us, here are the major changes implemented or attempted by the Trump administration:

Since the moment Donald Trump and Mike Pence walked into the White House, they have attacked the progress we have made toward full equality for the LGBTQ+ community and undermined…

HRC lists Trump's persistent attacks against the LGBTQ community after the RNC claims he's taken "unprecedented steps" in support of the community.

The signings come one day before Transgender Day of Visibility.

A law that prevents transgender girls from participating in girls' sports was blocked by lower court.

Out and About: The LGBT Experience In the Legal Profession is intended to address the experiences of LGBT attorneys, academics, and jurists in the legal profession. Through their own words, our authors help educate and promote justice in and through the legal profession for the LGBT community in all its diversity. This book also celebrates LGBT members of the bar by recognizing this diverse group, their contributions, and their struggles. Being an individual, doing your own thing no matter what everyone else is doing, is the heart of the essays that comprise this book. The writers share their experience of at once blending in and yet feeling different, vulnerable, and exposed. They speak of the ever-present potential to be treated differently simply because of who they are, giving these essays deeper meaning. Some of these authors endured secret pain, suffering in private, hiding personal lives from colleagues. Others barely soldiered through, endeavoring just to make the lives of their clients better. And some openly achieved great success, personally, professionally, or both. Each and every one merits attention. Each chapter of this book informs and inspires readers to broaden horizons, opening minds to the vast diversity of LGBT individuals. The book aims to improve the legal profession and the justice system itself by demonstrating the vast potential within all of us. There always have been people who "dance to the beat of a different drummer." The contributors to this collection of essays hope you dance to whatever music suits you! Book jacket.

"The first Hispanic and third woman appointed to the United States Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor has become an instant American icon. Now, with a candor and intimacy never undertaken by a sitting Justice, she recounts her life from a Bronx housing project to the federal bench, a journey that offers an inspiring testament to her own extraordinary determination and the power of believing in oneself. Here is the story of a precarious childhood, with an alcoholic father (who would die when she was nine) and a devoted but overburdened mother, and of the refuge a little girl took from the turmoil at home with her passionately spirited paternal grandmother. But it was when she was diagnosed with juvenile diabetes that the precocious Sonia recognized she must ultimately depend on herself. She would learn to give herself the insulin shots she needed to survive and soon imagined a path to a different life. With only television characters for her professional role models, and little understanding of what was involved, she determined to become a lawyer, a dream that would sustain her on an unlikely course, from valedictorian of her high school class to the highest honors at Princeton, Yale

Throughout U.S. history, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people have been pathologized, victimized, and criminalized. Reports of lynching, burning, or murdering of LGBTQ people has been documented for centuries Prior to the 1970s, LGBTQ people were deemed as having psychological disorders and subsequently subject to electroshock therapy and other ineffective and cruel treatments. LGBTQ people have historically been arrested or imprisoned for crimes like sodomy, cross-dressing, and gathering in public spaces. And while there have been many strides to advocate for LGBTQ rights in contemporary times, there are still many ways that the criminal justice system works against LGBTQ and their lives, liberties, and freedoms. Queering Law and Order: LGBTQ Communities and Fight for Justice examines the state of LGBTQ people within the criminal justice system. Intertwining legal cases, academic research, and popular media, the author reviews a wide range of issues - ranging from historical heterosexist and transphobic legislation to police brutality to the prison industrial complex to family law. Grounded in Queer Theory and intersectional lenses, each chapter provides recommendations for queering and disrupting the justice system. The book serves as both an academic resource and a call to action for readers who are interested in advocating for LGBTQ rights.

"This book braves a juxtaposition that might at first raise some eyebrows. Sorting Sexualities examines the legal management of sex offenders in sexually violent predator (SVP) trials alongside that of LGBTQ people seeking asylum from persecution in their home countries. Though these legal settings are diametrically opposed-one a punitive assessment, the other a protective one-they present a similar and telling conundrum: how do we know someone's sexuality? In both cases, state institutions are tasked with determining subjects' "true" sexualities, measuring the degree and type of "underlying deviance," and sorting the queer from the fraudulent. Stefan Vogler examines how and why the measurement and classification techniques that have emerged as a guide have come to diverge so dramatically. By delving into the histories behind these classification practices and analyzing their impact, Vogler shows how the science of sexuality is far more central to state power than we realize. Through legal analysis, interviews, and multi-sited ethnography, he examines how the state enrolls non-state experts-typically anthropologists, sociologists, and lawyers in asylum pleas, and psychiatrists and forensic psychologists in SVP trials-to help craft classificatory schemas that render sexual "others" legible to and thus manageable by the state. These classifications have led to the extension of rights for LGBTQ people, on the one hand, and the escalation of punishment for sex criminals, on the other"--

Rewriting the Supreme Court's landmark gay rights decision. Jack Balkin and an all-star cast of legal scholars, sitting as a hypothetical Supreme Court, rewrite the famous 2015 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, which guaranteed same-sex couples the right to marry. In eleven incisive opinions, the authors offer the best constitutional arguments for and against the right to same-sex marriage, and debate what Obergefell should mean for the future. In addition to serving as Chief Justice of this imaginary court, Balkin provides a critical introduction to the case. He recounts the story of the gay rights litigation that led to Obergefell, and he explains how courts respond to political mobilizations for new rights claims. The social movement for gay rights and marriage equality is a powerful example of how-through legal imagination and political struggle-arguments once dismissed as "off-the-wall" can later become established in American constitutional law.

The decision to have a child is seldom a simple one, often fraught with complexities regarding emotional readiness, finances, marital status, and compatibility with life and career goals. Rarely, though, do individuals consider the role of the law in facilitating or inhibiting their ability to have a child or to parent. For LGBT individuals, however, parenting is saturated with legality - including the initial decision of whether to have a child, how to have a child, whether one's relationship with their child will be recognized, and everyday acts of parenting like completing forms or picking up children from school. Through in-depth interviews with 137 LGBT parents, Amanda K. Baumle and D'Lane R. Compton examine the role of the law in the lives of LGBT parents and how individuals use the law when making decisions about family formation or parenting. Baumle and Compton explore the ways in which LGBT parents participate in the process of constructing legality through accepting, modifying, or rejecting legal meanings about their families. Few groups encounter as much variation in access to everyday legal rights pertaining to the family as do LGBT parents. This complexity and variation in legal environments provides a rather unique opportunity to examine the manner in which legal context affects the ways in which individuals come to understand the meaning and utility of the law for their lives. The authors conclude that legality is constructed through a complex interplay of legal context, social networks, individual characteristics, and familial desires. Ultimately, the stories of LGBT parents in this book reflect a rich and varied relationship between the law, the state, and the private family goals of individuals.

Should religious people who conscientiously object to facilitating same-sex weddings, and who therefore decline to provide cakes, photography, or other services, be exempted from antidiscrimination laws? This issue has taken on an importance far beyond the tiny number who have made such claims. Gay rights advocates fear that exempting even a few religious dissenters would unleash a devastating wave of discrimination. Conservative Christians fear that the law will treat them like racists and drive them to the margins of American society. Both sides are mistaken. This is not a matter of abstract principle, and none of the constitutional claims work. This is an appropriate occasion for legislative negotiation. This book is a systematic accounting of the interests that must be balanced in any decent compromise, in terms that both sides can recognise and appreciate.

The landmark Supreme Court decision in June 2015 legalizing the right to same-sex marriage marked a major victory in gay and lesbian rights in the United States. Once subject to a patchwork of laws granting legal status to same-sex couples in some states and not others, gay and lesbian Americans now enjoy full legal status for their marriages wherever they travel or reside in the country. For many, this means that gay and lesbian citizens are one step closer to full equality with the rest of America. However, author Stephen M. Engel contends that there remains much to be done in shaping American institutions to recognize gays and lesbians as full citizens. Tracing the relationship between gay and lesbian individuals and the government from the late 19th century through the early 21st, Engel shows that LGBT Americans are more accurately described as fragmented citizens who still do not have full legal protections against workplace, housing, family, and other kinds of discrimination. There remains a continuing struggle of the state to control their sexuality. Further, he argues that it was the state's ability to identify and control gay and lesbian citizens that allowed it to develop strong administrative capacities to manage all of its citizens in matters of immigration, labor relations, and even national security. The struggle for gay and lesbian rights, then, affected not only the lives of those seeking equality but also the very nature of American governance itself. Fragmented Citizens is a sweeping historical and political account of how our present-day policy debates around citizenship and equality came to be.--Adapted from dust jacket.

"Conservative opponents of LGBT equality in the United States often couch their opposition in claims of free speech, free association, and religious liberty. It is no surprise, then, that many LGBT supporters equate First Amendment arguments with resistance to their cause. The First Amendment and LGBT Equality tells another story, about the First Amendment's crucial, yet largely forgotten, role in the first few decades of the gay rights movement. Between the 1950s and 1980s, when many courts were still openly hostile to sexual minorities, they nonetheless recognized the freedom of gay and lesbian people to express themselves and associate with one another. Successful First Amendment cases protected LGBT publications and organizations, protests and parades, and individuals' right to come out. The amendment was wielded by the other side only after it had laid the groundwork for major LGBT equality victories. Carlos A. Ball illuminates the full trajectory of this legal and cultural history. He argues that, in accommodating those who dissent from LGBT equality on grounds of conscience, it is neither necessary nor appropriate to depart from the established ways in which American antidiscrimination law has, for decades, accommodated equality dissenters. But he also argues that as progressives fight the First Amendment claims of religious conservatives and other LGBT opponents today, they should take care not to erode the very safeguards of liberty that allowed LGBT rights to exist in the first place"--