The American Civil Liberties Union has today demanded documents from four federal agencies concerning a potential executive order that would sanction religiously motivated discrimination against LGBT people, members of minority faiths, women, and people seeking reproductive health care.
“The American people deserve to know whether this administration plans to protect the rights of all Americans or whether it will sanction discrimination,” said Louise Melling, deputy legal director for the ACLU. “The ACLU fights every day to defend religious freedom, but religious freedom does not mean the right to discriminate against or harm others. If President Trump signs an executive order that authorizes discrimination against women and LGBT people, we will see him in court.”
The Freedom of Information Act requests were filed with the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, Justice, and Treasury and seek any communications regarding the drafting of an executive order that would attempt to grant broad religious exemptions to organizations from rules barring discrimination. A draft version of the order leaked last month.
Among other items, the draft order would insert broad exemptions into existing nondiscrimination protections under the Affordable Care Act requiring employers to offer insurance coverage for contraception, authorize federally funded child welfare organizations to make decisions based on religious directives regardless of the best interests of the child, and allow federal employees, contractors, and grantees to discriminate against same-sex couples, transgender people, and women seeking reproductive health care.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) conserves America’s original civic values working in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in the United States by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Through the generous support of the Ford Foundation, 23 organizations in nine Deep South states heavily impacted by HIV/AIDS will receive critical support to fight the HIV epidemic by addressing the disparities and social injustices that fuel the epidemic. By adopting an intersectional approach, Southern REACH grantees will advance the rights, health and dignity of people affected by HIV in their communities.
The South is home to just 37% of the total U.S. population, yet almost half (49%) of all new HIV diagnoses happen in Deep South states. Further, many people living with HIV face overwhelming challenges such as racism, poverty, lack of access to education, HIV-related stigma, homophobia, transphobia, fear of deportation and lack of access to insurance and specialized HIV. These issues won’t be solved without strategic, effective advocacy that reaches far beyond constituencies historically focused on HIV.
That’s why the AIDS United Southern REACH (Regional Expansion of Access and Capacity to Address HIV/AIDS) grantees will tackle things differently. REACH grantees will address HIV-related disparities where public health and social justice intersect. This includes focusing on key areas such as community organizing and mobilization, meaningful involvement of people living with HIV in policymaking and the integration of HIV into key social and racial justice frameworks.
“The HIV epidemic continues through complex and deep-rooted social and economic inequities,” said Jesse Milan, Jr., AIDS United president & CEO. “We cannot end the epidemic and advance the lives of people living with HIV without addressing the disparities experienced by racial, gender and sexual minorities, and nowhere are these disparities more pronounced than in the U.S. South. This is difficult work, but AIDS United and the Ford Foundation are proud to be at the forefront of this movement.”
The 23 grantees were selected out of a highly competitive pool of applicants that came from HIV, reproductive justice, housing and other social movements. Each grantee has demonstrated the ability to make significant change in their community and a deep commitment to cross-movement collaboration. Grantees are focused on important issues such as protecting and advancing health care access, expanding legal services in the areas of housing and employment discrimination and combatting unjust HIV criminalization laws.
“It’s clear that we need to work together across movements to strengthen our collective efforts to advance equity and social justice,” said Darren Walker, president of the Ford Foundation. “I believe that Southern REACH, a program that we have supported for over 10 years, is a galvanizing force in the region. We are proud to support those in the vanguard of the struggle, especially in the American South where discrimination and harmful laws and policies are so pervasive,” said Walker.
Vermont tops a new ranking of states by the portion of adults in 2015 and 2016 who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) at 5.3%. Massachusetts (4.9%), California (4.9%), Oregon (4.9%) and Nevada (4.8%) round out the top five.
The District of Columbia’s 8.6% LGBT exceeds that of any of the states. States with the lowest percentage of LGBT-identifying residents include South Dakota (2.0%), North Dakota (2.7%), Idaho (2.8%), South Carolina (3.0%) and Montana (3.0%).
These figures are based on combined 2015 and 2016 data from more than 400,000 interviews and update Gallup’s state-level estimates from 2012. Consistent with Gallup research showing national increases in the percentage of adults identifying as LGBT from 3.5% in 2012 to 4.1% in 2016, the vast majority of states and the District of Columbia (42 out of 51) also report increases. However, most of the state-level changes are not statistically significant.
LGBT Identification Highest in the Pacific Region
At 4.9%, the Pacific region, which includes the West Coast, Alaska and Hawaii, has the highest portion of LGBT-identifying adults among eight regions in the U.S. The Pacific region also had the largest percentage-point increase (0.7 points) from 2012/2013 to 2015/2016. This change nudged it ahead of New England (4.5%), which reported a more modest 0.2-point increase.
The Middle Atlantic and Rocky Mountain regions also reported large increases (each 0.5 points) in the portion of adults identifying as LGBT. Among all regions, the West Central region continues to have the lowest percentage who identify as LGBT, but also showed a relatively large gain from 2.9% to 3.4%.
Percentage of U.S. Adults Identifying as LGBT, by Region
Region
2012-2013
2015-2016
Change
%
%
pct. pts.
Pacific (Calif., Ore., Wash., Hawaii, Alaska)
4.2
4.9
+0.7
New England (Maine, N.H., Vt., Mass., R.I., Conn.)
West Central (Wis., Minn., Iowa, Mo., N.D., S.D., Neb., Kan.)
2.9
3.4
+0.5
Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index
Multiple Factors Help Explain the Increases
A variety of factors influence changes in the portion of adults identifying as LGBT over time. Gallup research documents ongoing increases in the social acceptance of LGBT individuals in the U.S. Growing public acceptance can affect, and likely increase, the willingness of LGBT individuals to identify as such on surveys.
Nationally, virtually all of the increases in LGBT identification over the past five years are among millennials. Their coming of age at a time of greater social acceptance toward LGBT individuals may contribute to disproportionate increases in LGBT identity across states. As the youngest millennials reach 18 and enter Gallup’s national adult surveys, their influence on the national survey estimates increases proportionally. A third factor could be mobility: LGBT individuals, in theory, could be more likely to move to parts of the country with greater social acceptance. Other research, however, suggests that the chances of moving away from where one lived as a teenager do not vary much by sexual orientation. As a result, it’s unlikely that mobility plays a strong role in explaining differences in LGBT identity by state or region over time.
State-level rankings by the portion of adults identifying as LGBT clearly relate to the regional differences in LGBT social acceptance, which tend to be higher in the East and West and lower in the South and Midwest. Nevada is the only state in the top 10 that doesn’t have a coastal border. States ranked in the bottom 10 are dominated by those in the Midwest and South.
Proportion of U.S. Adults Who Are Millennials (Born 1980-1998) and Proportion Who Say Gay and Lesbian Relationships Should Be Legal, by Region
Millennials
Legality of gay/lesbian relations
% of population
% should be legal
New England
31
92
Middle Atlantic
33
77
East Central/Great Lakes
30
63
West Central
31
75
Southeast
31
58
Southwest
34
51
Rocky Mountain
33
66
Pacific
35
83
Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index (Millennials); May 4-8, 2016, Values and Beliefs Survey (Legality)
However, regional changes over time in LGBT identification may be affected both by levels of LGBT acceptance and the demographic composition of regional populations. Analyses of Gallup’s 2016 Values and Beliefs poll find that the New England and Pacific regions rank highest in LGBT acceptance but differ in the age composition of the population. More than a third of adults in the Pacific region (35%) are millennials, compared with 31% in New England — figures that, by population demographic standards, represent a relatively large difference. This difference may explain why, despite high levels of social acceptance in both regions, increases in LGBT identity are larger in the Pacific region than in New England.
The presence of large portions of millennials in the population does not perfectly predict the magnitude of increases in LGBT identity. Among regions, the Southwest has a relatively large proportion of millennials in its population (34%) but is also the region least likely to say that gay and lesbian relationships should be legal. This relatively low level of acceptance may be a factor in explaining the relatively low level of change in LGBT identity despite having a large younger population.
Bottom Line
State and regional changes in the level of LGBT identification defy simple explanation. However, it does appear that variation among states and regions in population demographics, especially age, and LGBT social acceptance (or stigma) interact to affect the willingness of adults to identify as LGBT.
Percentage of U.S. Adults Identifying as LGBT by State, 2015-2016
Do you, personally, identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender?
2015-2016
Sample size
%
District of Columbia
8.6
1,746
Vermont
5.3
2,200
Massachusetts
4.9
15,193
California
4.9
69,467
Oregon
4.9
11,859
Nevada
4.8
5,888
Delaware
4.7
1,976
New Hampshire
4.6
3,129
Washington
4.6
17,782
New York
4.5
41,203
Maine
4.5
4,094
Colorado
4.3
13,844
Florida
4.2
42,605
New Mexico
4.2
5,790
Indiana
4.1
15,642
Rhode Island
4.0
2,395
Arizona
4.0
17,402
Minnesota
4.0
13,176
Georgia
4.0
20,999
Illinois
3.9
22,199
Maryland
3.9
12,532
Hawaii
3.8
2,121
Michigan
3.8
19,860
Ohio
3.8
25,535
Louisiana
3.7
9,958
Texas
3.6
53,349
Pennsylvania
3.6
32,473
New Jersey
3.6
18,575
Nebraska
3.6
5,646
Wyoming
3.5
2,202
Oklahoma
3.5
10,689
North Carolina
3.5
23,169
Connecticut
3.5
7,984
Virginia
3.4
20,357
Wisconsin
3.4
14,078
Missouri
3.4
13,632
West Virginia
3.4
4,635
Utah
3.3
8,349
Kentucky
3.3
10,804
Iowa
3.2
8,064
Mississippi
3.2
6,783
Tennessee
3.1
17,050
Kansas
3.1
7,024
Alaska
3.0
2,225
Alabama
3.0
12,133
Arkansas
3.0
7,938
Montana
3.0
4,235
South Carolina
3.0
11,166
Idaho
2.8
4,858
North Dakota
2.7
2,079
South Dakota
2.0
2,160
Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index
Survey Methods
These results of estimates are based on telephone interviews with a random sample of 473,243 U.S. adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, collected from June 1, 2012, through Dec. 30, 2013, and 710,252 adults collected from Jan. 1, 2015, through Dec. 30, 2016, as part of the Gallup Daily tracking survey and the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index survey. The data include 14,487 respondents from 2012/2013 and 23,483 from 2015/2016 who said yes when asked, “Do you, personally identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender?” The margin of error for each region varies from ±0.1 to ±0.4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level and varies among states from ±0.2 to ±1.6 percentage points, depending on sample size. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting at the state level.
Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 60% cellphone respondents and 40% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.
President Donald Trump announced Thursday that he had signed three executive orders that stand to significantly increase the criminalization and incarceration of some of the nation’s most vulnerable populations by broadening law enforcement agencies’ powers.
“Trump’s executive orders that expand the discretionary power of police enforcement are a clear attack on freedom, justice and equality. These new polices are intended to further criminalize, imprison, and deny justice to the nation’s most targeted populations including people of color, people living below the poverty line, and LGBTQ people,” said Rea Carey, National LGBTQ Task Force Executive Director.
A report published in 2014 shows that 73% of LGBTQ respondents had an interaction with police in the last five years. 21% of those respondents reported hostile attitudes from officers, 14% reported verbal assault by police, 3% reported sexual harassment and 2% reported physical assault by officers. Furthermore, in 2016, of the 963 people shot by police officers, about half of those people were people of color and almost 25% were Black—while Black people only make up 13% of the U.S. population.
“Law enforcement already has too much power, and too much discretion. We don’t need anything more to ‘stop crimes against law enforcement officers;’ in fact all 50 states have laws that make it a serious crime to assault or kill law enforcement officers. There is no evidence that these laws are under-enforced,” said Carey.
According to FBI data, LGBTQ people are the most likely group to experience a hate crime. Around 60% of LGBTQ people who experience hate violence are people of color. Of people who reported hate violence to police, 80% said the police were indifferent or hostile. Unsurprisingly, only 56% of survivors of hate violence report those incidents to police. In 2014, law enforcement agencies reported almost 5,500 incidents of hate violence against people of color, LGBTQ people, and religious minorities.
“Trump’s actions are yet another example of how laws intended to protect vulnerable populations are instead being manipulated to harm those who are intended to be protected. Hate crimes laws are intended to aid prosecutions for crimes that were under-charged or not charged at all. These Executive Orders will only increase policing and prosecutions of people of color, LGBTQ people, and lower-income people,” said Meghan Maury, National LGBTQ Task Force Criminal and Economic Justice Project Director.
A barrage of anti-LGBTQ bills are being pushed in the Oklahoma state legislature by anti-equality activists. With state lawmakers set to convene Feb. 6th for the 2017 legislative session, at least eight bills attacking LGBTQ Oklahomans and their families are already in the docket for consideration — the most of any state in the nation. HRC and Freedom Oklahoma are warning the state’s lawmakers to look to North Carolina as a warning, where a deeply discriminatory anti-LGBTQ law continues to wreak havoc on the people, reputation, and economy of the state.
The far reaching discriminatory bills in Oklahoma include a proposal restricting transgender people from using school facilities consistent with their gender identity; numerous pieces of legislation attempting to undermine marriage equality; legislation targeting LGBTQ youth; and proposals aimed at authorizing individuals, businesses, and taxpayer-funded agencies to refuse goods or services to LGBTQ people under the guise of religion.
“Passage of any of these discriminatory bills would be incredibly harmful to Oklahoma’s economy and result in multiple, expensive legal challenges,” said HRC Legal Director Sarah Warbelow. “These legislative proposals targeting LGBTQ people and their families are shameful, far-reaching, and blatant attacks on fairness and equality. North Carolina is a clear example of the consequences that come with ramming discriminatory legislation into law. Instead of plowing down the same destructive path, Oklahoma lawmakers must reject these vile proposals.”
“Once again, 3 of the 149 sitting Oklahoma lawmakers have proposed multiple anti-LGBTQ bills aimed at further marginalizing their lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans constituents,” said Freedom Oklahoma Executive Director Troy Stevenson. “To be clear, Senator Joseph Silk, Senator Josh Brecheen, and Representative Chuck Strohm have formed a small cabal of bias under the dome at the Oklahoma State Capitol, and we will do everything in our power to assure they fail in their attempt to harm our community and the economic stability or our state.”
The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) announced its opposition to President Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court of the United States.
“Never in the history of our movement have we had more at stake as a community, or as a country,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “Since the moment he stepped foot in the Oval Office, President Trump has attacked equality. He has signed executive orders that undermine our country’s most cherished values and appointed anti-LGBTQ cabinet nominees who have spent their careers undermining civil rights. And now, he has nominated Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, fulfilling his campaign promise to nominate a justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia, one of the most vehemently anti-LGBTQ justices to ever sit on the court who once went so far as to compare gay people to murderers. The Supreme Court has played a central role in advancing the promise of equality for LGBTQ Americans, and Judge Gorsuch’s anti-equality record — from opposing crucial medical treatment for a transgender person to supporting a license to discriminate for private corporations — make him unfit to sit on the nation’s highest court. We cannot afford a justice who will roll back our rights, or who will be a rubber stamp for Donald Trump’s unconstitutional actions. And America cannot afford to have Judge Gorsuch on the Supreme Court. We oppose this nomination.”
Gorsuch has a long and troubling career opposing civil rights, including for LGBTQ people:
Gorsuch called marriage equality part of the liberal social agenda, saying. “American liberals have become addicted to the courtroom… as the primary means of effecting their social agenda on everything from gay marriage to assisted suicide…”
He joined the Tenth Circuit’s decision in Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius, which asserted that that some private corporations are “people” under federal law and have a right to deny basic healthcare coverage if it violates their religious belief. This expansive ruling could allow employers to deny transgender employees access to hormone treatment, access to birth control and other crucial health care for LGBTQ people.
Hobby Lobby could have negative long-term consequences beyond health care for the LGBTQ community. There are those who are already trying to use the decision to support discrimination against LGBTQ workers.
In 2015, Gorsuch joined a ruling against a transgender woman who was denied consistent access to hormone therapy while incarcerated. The ruling dismissed the prisoner’s claims that the denial of care amounted to cruel and unusual punishment under the U.S. Constitution.
He has advocated for eliminating Chevron deference, a critical administrative law doctrine that allows our federal system of regulations to function, which could result in the significant loss protections for LGBTQ people.
Given this record, HRC has taken the extraordinary step of opposing this Supreme Court nominee prior to his confirmation hearing — a first for the organization. Donald Trump used recommendations from the Heritage Foundation, a staunchly conservative and anti-equality think tank, to create a shortlist of candidates for the seat on the Court — an organization that has fought every LGBTQ equality case that has come before the Supreme Court. Judge Gorsuch’s record, coupled with Trump’s discriminatory executive actions, his other, troubling appointees, and the campaign promise to appoint a justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia leaves no room for us to doubt that his pick will be negative for the LGBTQ community.
LGBT people in America face discrimination in their daily lives. A majority of states allow discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations. While there are more states every day that strive to pass laws to protect their citizens from discrimination, many legislatures sponsor bills that invoke religion, pre-empt local protections, and target transgender people to allow discrimination.
Below is an update from the ACLU on legislation affecting LGBT rights across the country. All of the bills ann be viewed at www.aclu.org/LGBTbills.
“State legislatures are yet again invoking religious freedom to undermine the rights of LGBT people, even though businesses, sports teams, and the public have soundly rejected this divisive strategy year after year,” said Eunice Rho, ACLU Advocacy & Policy Counsel. “Wyoming, Virginia, and South Dakota all have dangerous bills that are poised for a vote within the next week. These bills would allow taxpayer-funded discrimination by individuals, businesses, nonprofits, and more. They must be stopped.”
A few noteworthy bills are highlighted below.
Virginia – bill allowing religious organizations receiving taxpayer funds to discriminate
House Bill 2025 would protect religious organizations that discriminate and would allow them to use taxpayer funds to do so. This bill could be moved out of the House Committee on General Laws and to a floor vote as early as this week.
Rather than solving any actual problem, HB 2025 could allow:
A religiously-affiliated hospital that receives public funding to refuse to allow a married gay person to make medical decisions for their injured spouse (citing a refusal to recognize the marriage); or
A homeless shelter that receives a government contract to serve the public to refuse family housing to a same-sex couple with children; or
A disaster relief organization to fire a caseworker for marrying a same-sex partner.
Wyoming HB 135 – a First Amendment Defense Act (FADA)
The last day for HB 135 to be heard in the House Judiciary Committee is Thursday, February 3. Then, it would move immediately to the House floor, where it must be voted out by February 7.
Wyoming’s House Bill 135, the so-called “Government Nondiscrimination Act,” strongly resembles the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), a similar version of which is still pending in Congress. Another version of this bill passed in Mississippi in 2016 and is currently enjoined as a result of a successful lawsuit.
If passed, HB 135 would protect anyone who sought to discriminate based on their religiously-held beliefs that (a) marriage is limited to a man and a woman or (b) gender identity is fixed at birth. This means that government employees, licensed professionals (such as counselors or teachers), and private businesses would be able to discriminate against LGBT people. In response, the government’s hands would be tied; a discriminatory employee could not lose his or her job, cities like Laramie could not enforce their nondiscrimination laws, and a counselor would still keep his or her professional license and continue practicing.
South Dakota SB 115 – bill targeting transgender students
Despite the governor’s veto last year of a similar bill, South Dakota lawmakers introduced an anti-transgender bill (Senate Bill 115) this week. The bill would prohibit schools from allowing transgender students to use locker rooms, changing rooms or other shared facilities that match the gender they live every day. Instead, students would be forced to use the facilities that match their anatomy at birth, as shown on their original birth certificate. This bill would further isolate and stigmatize vulnerable young people.
The bill will be heard by the Senate Education Committee at 7:45 a.m. CT on Tuesday, January 31.
Oklahoma – a host of bills undermining LGBT rights
In the past week, the Oklahoma legislature has filed a number of bills undermining LGBT rights. Oklahoma’s 2017 legislative session will begin on Monday, February 6.
Senate Bill 197 would allow any individuals, privately-held businesses, or a religious organization to refuse – based on religious beliefs about a “marriage, lifestyle, or behavior” – to provide goods, services, accommodations, etc., to promote, endorse, or be used in a marriage ceremony. This would open the door to discriminate against not just same-sex couples and transgender people, but also interfaith couples, or anyone else a business might claim an objection to.
Senate Bill 530 is a Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) that expands the scope of the existing RFRA to allow it to be used to sue private businesses, not just the government. In addition, by expanding the definition of “substantial burden,” it could allow for a broader range of potential lawsuits.
House Bill 1507 allows any private child-placing agencies to refuse performing, counseling, or even referring a child for adoption or foster care placement if the agency has a religious objection. This law, if passed, would ensure that the agency is still entitled to government contracts and taxpayer funding.
The Trump administration has removed from the State Department Web site former Secretary of State John Kerry’s apology for the infamous “Lavender Scare” witch hunt in the 1950s and 1960s, as well as other content regarding LGBTQ pride month observances and the State Department’s Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBT Persons.
Kerry apologized and acknowledged the existence of discriminatory practices within the State Department targeted toward eliminating homosexuals within the organization. Agencies, like the CIA, would filter out perceived LGBTQ employees on the grounds that homosexuality could be used as leverage by foreign adversaries.
The apology, according to a report on GAYRVA.com, was online until today.
“With each passing hour, the Trump administration continues to show the extent of their contempt for the enormous progress made over the past eight years,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “Secretary Kerry’s apology to LGBTQ employees and their families who were targeted, harassed and fired set the right tone for the State Department, even if it couldn’t undo the damage done decades ago. It is outrageous that the new administration would attempt to erase from the record this historic apology for witch hunts that destroyed the lives of innocent Americans. The apology, along with the other important LGBTQ content that has been removed, should immediately be restored, and President Trump should condemn such behavior at all departments and agencies.”
The Trump administration appears to be systematically scrubbing the progress made for LGBTQ people from official Web sites. On the same day of President Trump’s inauguration, the new administration also removed every mention of LGBTQ people from the White House Web site and removed the Department of Labor’s crucial report on LGBTQ worker rights. In the past, Vice President Mike Pence has consistently opposed efforts by the United States to promote LGBTQ equality around the globe.
Secretary Kerry’s apology can be found here via an archive captured by Wayback Machine. The apology on the State Department Web site was posted here prior to its removal.
The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) released a new report previewing battles against anti-LGBTQ state legislation expected in the year ahead. With at least 40 anti-LGBTQ bills in 16 states introduced so far, HRC anticipates that, as in 2016, anti-equality activists will push for legislation giving a license to discriminate against LGBTQ people under the guise of religion; measures specifically targeting transgender people; and proposals to eliminate local LGBTQ non-discrimination protections, among others. The new analysis also highlights opportunities to advance LGBTQ equality in 2017.
“Lawmakers seeking to target LGBTQ people would do well to heed the lessons learned in North Carolina, where legislators are still working to repeal HB2 and undo the damage wrought by that hateful law,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “Like last year, we will be working closely with state partners across the country to prevent lawmakers from plowing down a destructive path that threatens LGBTQ people and wrecks a state’s economy and reputation. It’s time to recognize that Americans have moved inexorably in the direction of equality and there is no appetite for anti-LGBTQ politicking.”
In recent years, the steady increase in public support for LGBTQ equality has been met with a wave of anti-LGBTQ legislation being introduced in state legislatures. As lawmakers begin new sessions in state capitols around the country, HRC is bracing for a repeat of the 2015 and 2016 sessions, with hundreds of anti-LGBTQ bills filed. In 2016, legislators in 38 states filed more than 250 bills meant to restrict the rights of LGBTQ individuals and their families. With hard work, collective cooperation, and tight focus throughout the state and national LGBTQ equality movement, only 8 of those bills passed both legislative chambers, and after gubernatorial vetoes, just 5 bills actually became law. However, with the 2016 election results, 2017 has the potential to be even more challenging. As the 2017 legislative sessions begin, more states will have Republican single-party control in the House, Senate, and Governor’s office than in the previous legislative period.
The discriminatory legislation targeting LGBTQ people is taking many different forms across the country. They range from measures specifically targeting transgender people and seeking to prevent them from accessing sex-segregated facilities consistent with their gender identity; legislation aimed to authorize individuals, businesses, and taxpayer-funded agencies to cite religion as an excuse to refuse goods or services to LGBTQ people; and bills seeking to eliminate the ability of local governments to protect LGBTQ residents and visitors from discrimination, among other proposals.
Continued Southern Focus
Most of the anti-LGBTQ legislation considered in 2016 was introduced in southern states, and 2017 is expected to be the same with significant concerns being raised in Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia. In fact, in these and other states, more than three dozen bills are already on the docket for consideration, and there is no doubt there will be more as the legislative sessions progress.
Advocates are especially concerned with the threats posed by lawmakers in the Lone Star State. It is clear the Texas Legislature expects to take up religious refusal bills, anti-transgender legislation, and other discriminatory proposals. It will take the full force of the LGBTQ movement, business and civic leaders, and other stakeholders to ensure Texas does not pass anti-LGBTQ laws this session.
Pro-Equality Legislation
Although the legislative environment in a majority of states will not likely be open to considering pro- equality bills, there are a few places where movement is possible. Leaders in New Hampshire and New York will continue to consider whether to add gender identity to their state non-discrimination laws. Legislators in California are expected to remain on the cutting edge of passing laws protecting LGBTQ people. In Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota and Ohio, legislators will again be presented with the opportunity to add sexual orientation and gender identity to state non-discrimination laws, while in Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Rhode Island, consideration could be given to laws protecting minors from incredibly harmful conversion therapy.
Ballot Initiatives
Last year marked one of the rare recent years where there was not a repeal of pro-LGBTQ state or local legislation on the ballot anywhere. Unfortunately, the future holds several challenges in attempts by anti-equality activists to undo important legislative protections for LGBTQ people.
Activists in Massachusetts have already secured enough signatures to place a repeal of the new gender identity public accommodations law on the ballot in November of 2018. Freedom Massachusetts, the campaign that includes the Human Rights Campaign and other organizations that secured the legislative victory, is already at work to protect the law when it goes to the ballot. Meanwhile, opposition forces in Washington State were unable to secure enough signatures in 2016 to take a repeal of the state’s 10-year- old non-discrimination law to the ballot, but are expected to make another attempt in 2017. And in Maine, extremists have received approval to collect signatures to place on the ballot the removal of “sexual orientation” from the state’s Human Rights Act.
After the governor’s veto of discriminatory anti-transgender student legislation in South Dakota, anti-LGBTQ forces in the state have threatened a ballot referendum if a bill similar to the one vetoed by Governor Daugaard does not pass in the 2017 legislative session.
The full report — Preview 2017: Pro-Equality and Anti-LGBTQ State and Local Legislation — can be found here.
Today, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Foundation released the results of a groundbreaking post-election survey of more than 50,000 young people ages 13-18 revealing the deeply damaging fallout the November election has had on youth across the United States.
The online survey, believed to be the largest ever of its kind, found that 70 percent of respondents have witnessed bullying, hate messages or harassment since the election, with racial bias the most common motive cited. More than a quarter of LGBTQ youth said they have been personally bullied or harassed since Election Day — compared to 14 percent of non-LGBTQ youth — with transgender young people most frequently targeted. Additionally, Hispanic and Latinx respondents were 20 percent more likely than other youth to report having been personally bullied, with harassment targeting both immigrant and nonimmigrant communities.
“Whether the threats come in their schools or from those holding the country’s highest offices, no young person should be bullied or made to feel unsafe,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “The alarming results of this groundbreaking survey underscore our fears about the damaging effect the recent election is having on our nation’s youth, and serve as a call to action to all of us committed to helping our young people thrive in an inclusive and supportive society.”
Vast numbers of young people also reported feeling nervous and hopeless post-election, with almost half of LGBTQ youth saying they have taken steps to hide who they are by delaying coming out, dressing differently or questioning their plans for the future. Hispanic and African American young people also reported changing their appearances and routines out of fear of harassment, and Muslim, Jewish and Hindu youth all described concealing symbols of their faith to avoid being targeted.
In responses to open-ended questions on the survey, many young people shared heart-wrenching stories of how the vicious campaign rhetoric had encouraged harassment and bullying. Wrote one Hispanic 18-year-old from Illinois, “My family and I go shopping and wash clothes at 2 a.m. to avoid seeing and hearing people’s comments.” A transgender youth from Idaho wrote that they and a Latinx friend were confronted at school by a fellow student who said, “Donald Trump is gonna deport wastes of space like you, and hopefully he does something about freaks like you too.”
Findings include:
Seventy percent of respondents reported witnessing bullying, hate messages or harassment during or since the 2016 election. Of those, 79 percent said such behaviors have been occurring more frequently since the onset of the presidential campaign.
Among young people who reported seeing bullying and harassment, 70 percent had witnessed incidents motivated by race or ethnicity, 63 percent had seen incidents motivated by sexual orientation, 59 percent had seen incidents motivated by immigration status, and 55 percent had witnessed incidents motivated by gender.
Over the past 30 days, about half of transgender youth reported feeling hopeless and worthless most or all of the time, and 70 percent said that these and similar feelings have increased in the past 30 days. Thirty-six percent had been personally bullied or harassed, and 56 percent had changed their self-expression or future plans because of the election.
Before Election Day 2016, more than half of survey respondents reported thinking about the election every day, and a third thought about it several times each week.
In one encouraging finding, despite widespread post-election fear and anxiety, young people said they are more committed than ever to supporting others who are targeted for discrimination and harassment. Fifty-seven percent said that since Election Day, they more frequently feel motivated to help people in their community.
Wrote one 15-year-old from North Carolina: “The best way for adults to reassure youth, especially minorities, is to get involved in the community and take action to make the world a better place, whether it is through volunteering at a homeless shelter, working on a campaign, or something else. Actions speak louder than words.”
Respondents were solicited through HRC’s social media channels and those of partner organizations, including Mental Health America, the National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Southern Poverty Law Center, True Colors Fund and The Trevor Project.