McDonald’s Agrees To Training and Settlement After Staff Called Gay Customers “Faggots,” Super-Size Training For Management Offered After Kentucky Incident
LOUISVILLE, KY – Nine months after an employee at a McDonald’s restaurant in downtown Louisville called a group of gay customers a series of anti-gay slurs, the American Civil Liberties Union announced today that McDonald’s has agreed to a cash settlement and diversity training for management at 30 of its Louisville-area restaurants.
Ryan Marlatt, Teddy Eggers, and three other friends had stopped for lunch at a McDonald’s restaurant on East Market Street on July 26, 2008 while visiting Louisville for the weekend. While they waited for their food to be prepared, an employee behind the counter referred to them as “faggots” to another employee. When Marlatt and Eggers objected to the slur and asked to speak with a manager, the employee who had called them “faggots” started arguing with them, repeatedly calling them “faggots” in front of other customers and calling one of them a “cocksucker” and “bitch.”
“The reason we made such a big deal out of this to begin with was because we didn’t want it happening to anyone else, so I’m very glad McDonald’s management is going to be having these trainings,” said Eggers of Indianapolis, Indiana. “We were hurt and upset, but at least we’re adults and can handle being called names. We hated thinking that this kind of harassment might also happen to someone young and vulnerable who would really take it to heart.”
The supervisor on duty refused to refund the group’s purchase, so Marlatt attempted several times in the following weeks to contact both the general manager of the McDonald’s and the corporate offices, with no results. Louisville law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, so the ACLU filed a complaint in September on behalf of Marlatt and Eggers with the Louisville Human Relations Commission. In October, representatives of a variety of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender groups as well as other civil rights organizations protested at the downtown Louisville McDonald’s where the incident took place.
Although Marlatt and Eggers only asked for $28, McDonald’s offered them $2000 each on its own, which they accepted, Sun said. The Louisville Human Relations Commission has been thoroughly investigating Eggers and Marlatt’s complaint since it was filed last September and helped negotiate the settlement between the parties.
“We’re really grateful to the Louisville Metro Human Relations Commission for its investigation, as well as to our friends at the Fairness Campaign, and commonGround at the University of Louisville, for keeping the pressure on McDonald’s to do the right thing,” said Michael Aldridge, Executive Director of the ACLU of Kentucky. “While we’re fortunate to have a law banning sexual orientation discrimination in Louisville, this goes to show that it’s still important to speak out and do something about it when your rights are violated.”
“McDonald’s could have saved itself a lot of embarrassment if they’d just done the right thing from the start and done something about this, but it’s great that so many people stood up for us and came forward to say treating people the way we were treated is wrong,” said Marlatt. “We just hope the trainings keep McDonald’s from letting this happen to any of their customers from now on.”
When their Louisville Human Relations Commission complaint was filed, Marlatt and Eggers asked for a refund of the money they spent on the McDonald’s meal, and asked that one employee – the cashier who objected to the other employee’s name-calling – be commended. “She was the only employee in the whole place who tried to help us,” said Eggers. “I hope she hears about this and knows how much we appreciated her sticking up for us.”
“While we wish Ryan, Teddy, and their friends hadn’t had to go through this whole experience to begin with, we’re glad that at least McDonald’s is taking steps to prevent anything like this from happening again in the future,” said Christine Sun, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project who is representing Marlatt and Eggers. “Businesses should treat all of their customers with respect regardless of their sexual orientation.”
A video of Marlatt and Eggers telling the story of what happened to them as well as their complaint to the Human Relations Commission can be found at http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/discrim/36781res20080916.html.
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/mcdonalds-agr…
New Mexico Agrees To Provide Retirement Health Insurance To Domestic Partners Of State Employees
“We are very pleased that the state has agreed to settle this litigation and provide the insurance. It wasn’t fair that the state forced lesbian and gay employees to pay the high cost of health care for often inferior health insurance for their families when they worked just as hard as their straight colleagues,” said Peter Simonson of the ACLU of New Mexico. “I’m sure this will be welcome news to all lesbian and gay state employees, but especially to those who have retired or are planning to do so soon.”
The ACLU brought the lawsuit on February 5, 2007 on behalf lesbian and gay state employees and their domestic partners. The lawsuit charged that it was a violation of the state constitution’s equal protection guarantees for the state to treat lesbian and gay employees differently from its straight employees. The settlement will reached with the state will cover both gay and straight employees and their domestic partners. The ACLU brought the lawsuit on February 5, 2007 on behalf lesbian and gay state employees and their domestic partners. The lawsuit charged that it was a violation of the state constitution’s equal protection guarantees for the state to treat lesbian and gay employees differently from its straight employees. The settlement will reached with the state will cover both gay and straight employees and their domestic partners.
“This is fantastic news. We can finally start planning our retirement,” said Havens Levitt who has been a teacher for the Albuquerque public school for 25 years. “Until now, our only option was for me to keep working because my partner’s employment doesn’t provide insurance for her and private insurance was just too expensive. It means a lot that the state has acknowledged I should be treated the same as my straight colleagues.” Levitt and her partner, Rebecca Dakota, have been partners for 13 years. Dakota is a self-employed consultant to non-profits and an independent filmmaker.
Pursuant to the settlement, the state has agreed to develop a process for enrolling those interested during the next open enrollment period, which comes this fall.
The legal team for the ACLU in Levitt and Dakota v. New Mexico is George Bach, staff attorney with the ACLU of New Mexico, Ken Choe, a senior staff attorney with the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project of the ACLU, and cooperating attorney Maureen Sanders of Sanders & Westbrook, P.C.
Additional information about the case including a Q&A and the legal papers is available at http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/28241res20070205.html.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/new-mexico-ag…
Arizona School Agrees To Lift Rainbow Ban Following ACLU Demands; Gay Student Now Allowed To Wear Wristband
Quintanilla contacted the ACLU in February after her son Chris’s principal told her he wouldn’t allow her son to wear his cloth wristband with words “Rainbows are gay” to school anymore. Last week, the school finally gave assurances to the ACLU that it would not censor Quintanilla’s wristband in the future.
“Students have a constitutional right to free speech at school, and school officials should be aware of their responsibility for upholding this cornerstone of our freedom,” said Elizabeth Gill, staff attorney for the ACLU national Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project. “This district was right to come to its senses and back down from violating the First Amendment, because students have 40 years of Supreme Court precedent on their side when schools do this kind of thing.”
In its letter, the ACLU reminded PUSD officials about the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Tinker v. Des Moines in which the Court wrote, “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights… at the schoolhouse gate.” The letter also pointed to Gillman v. Holmes County School District, a Florida case in which a high school principal had attempted to ban symbols in support of LGBT rights, including rainbows, at school. In that case, a federal judge ruled last May that the school had violated students’ First Amendment rights. Both cases were handled by the ACLU, which celebrated the 40th anniversary of the Tinker decision in February.
“The schools we entrust to teach our children about society and their freedoms should know better than to violate one of our most fundamental freedoms,” said Alessandra Soler Meetze, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arizona. “We’re glad that PUSD has seen the light about this, but we’re going to be keeping an eye on this district and hold them to their word that they’ll respect the First Amendment from now on.”
The letter the ACLU sent to the district last month is available here:
http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/lgbt/schoolsyouth/az_armb_letter.pdf.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/arizona-schoo…
Lambda warns school officials : hands off South Medford High School student and Gay Straight Alliance
(Medford, Oregon, April 17, 2009) — Lambda Legal has sent a letter of support to South Medford High School Principal Kevin Campbell, Medford School District Superintendent Phil Long, and the School Board on behalf of South Medford High School student and Gay Straight Alliance member Connie McNair.
The letter objects that school officials have been imposing restrictions on the Medford High GSA to which no other on-campus group is subject and that seriously burden club members’ free speech and associational rights. These include requiring GSA members to get prior approval for their announcements and activities from an assistant principal, deeming the club’s legitimate educational activities illicit “proselytizing,” and even prohibiting the club from formally announcing today’s “Day of Silence.” The Day of Silence is a national event calling attention to anti-gay bullying and harassment in schools.
In the letter, Lambda Legal Staff Attorney Tara Borelli writes “While we hope that the school’s actions to deter the GSA’s activities are simply the result of confusion about its obligations, the law in this area is well-established and school’s unequal treatment of the GSA is difficult to understand and should be remedied swiftly.”
In addition to the freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution, public school students are also protected by the federal Equal Access Act. The EAA says that if a school receives federal funds and allows extracurricular student groups to meet, it cannot discriminate against any of the groups based on the content of its speech. GSA groups across the country have used the EAA in court to protect their right to free speech.
“It’s simply unlawful for South Medford High School to create unequal obstacles for Connie or the GSA, or to stifle the GSA’s announcements about the Day of Silence,” said Borelli. “We want to remind South Medford school officials that they have a responsibility to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students, and we’re asking them to lift any restriction applying to the GSA but not to other groups.
“All we want is safety and equality within our school,” said McNair. “Our GSA members want
students, school officials, and the community to know that we can’t be discriminated against based on our speech or activities.” * Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/lambda-warns-…
Lambda slams school officals re: South Medford High School student and Gay Straight Alliance
(Medford, Oregon, April 17, 2009) — Lambda Legal has sent a letter of support to South Medford High School Principal Kevin Campbell, Medford School District Superintendent Phil Long, and the School Board on behalf of South Medford High School student and Gay Straight Alliance member Connie McNair.
The letter objects that school officials have been imposing restrictions on the Medford High GSA to which no other on-campus group is subject and that seriously burden club members’ free speech and associational rights. These include requiring GSA members to get prior approval for their announcements and activities from an assistant principal, deeming the club’s legitimate educational activities illicit “proselytizing,” and even prohibiting the club from formally announcing today’s “Day of Silence.” The Day of Silence is a national event calling attention to anti-gay bullying and harassment in schools.
In the letter, Lambda Legal Staff Attorney Tara Borelli writes “While we hope that the school’s actions to deter the GSA’s activities are simply the result of confusion about its obligations, the law in this area is well-established and school’s unequal treatment of the GSA is difficult to understand and should be remedied swiftly.”
In addition to the freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution, public school students are also protected by the federal Equal Access Act. The EAA says that if a school receives federal funds and allows extracurricular student groups to meet, it cannot discriminate against any of the groups based on the content of its speech. GSA groups across the country have used the EAA in court to protect their right to free speech.
“It’s simply unlawful for South Medford High School to create unequal obstacles for Connie or the GSA, or to stifle the GSA’s announcements about the Day of Silence,” said Borelli. “We want to remind South Medford school officials that they have a responsibility to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students, and we’re asking them to lift any restriction applying to the GSA but not to other groups.
“All we want is safety and equality within our school,” said McNair. “Our GSA members want
students, school officials, and the community to know that we can’t be discriminated against based on our speech or activities.”
Lambda Legal has given school officials until May 1 to respond to the letter.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/lambda-slams-…
Attorneys Urge California Supreme Court To Invalidate Prop 8
(San Francisco, CA, March 5, 2009) Attorneys for same-sex couples, civil rights organizations and the state Attorney General’s office appeared before the California Supreme Court today to urge the court to strike down Proposition 8, which took away the right of same-sex couples the right to marry. At issue in the case is whether the ballot initiative process can be used to take away a fundamental right only for one group of Californians based on a trait – in this case sexual orientation – that has no relevance to the group’s ability to participate in or contribute to society. Because the case has serious implications for the constitutional rights of all Californians, it has generated unprecedented support from many national and state civil rights groups as well as California legislators, local governments, bar associations, business interests, labor unions, and religious groups. The California Supreme Court, which has struck down several other initiatives in the past, is expected to issue a decision within 90 days.
“Proposition 8 jeopardizes not just the right of same-sex couples to marry, but the rights of all Californians to be treated as free and equal citizens of this state,” said Shannon P. Minter, Legal Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), who argued the case before the Court. “Our Constitution is based on the principle that majorities must respect minority rights. But if a majority can change the Constitution to take away a fundamental right from one group, then it can take away fundamental rights from any group. Our government will have changed from one that respects minority rights to one in which the power of the majority is unlimited.”
NCLR, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU filed the legal challenge on November 5, after Proposition 8 was approved by just 52 percent of the voters on Election Day. In court today, the groups argued that it was improper for the proponents of Proposition 8 to use the ballot initiative process to strip same-sex couples of the fundamental right to marry. The groups contend that changes to the Constitution that alter its core requirement of equal protection by selectively depriving minorities of fundamental constitutional rights cannot be accomplished through a simple majority vote. Such major changes of core structural principles are revisions to the Constitution that can only be put on the ballot by a two-thirds vote of both houses of the legislature.
“It is simply wrong—legally and socially—to short-circuit the California Constitution and its equal protection guarantees,” said Jennifer C. Pizer, Marriage Project Director for Lambda Legal and co-counsel in the legal challenge to Proposition 8. “Proposition 8 is no ‘garden variety’ amendment that changes a tax or zoning or safety rule in a way that affects everyone equally. This is a radical attempt to strip a cherished constitutional right from just one targeted minority group and then to stop the courts from doing their most basic job of upholding the constitutional promise of ‘liberty and justice for all’.”
The case before the court is unprecedented because no other initiative-amendment has successfully taken away a fundamental right only for a particular minority. Because Proposition 8 would, for the first time, change the Constitution in a way that strips a minority group of its constitutional right to equal treatment under the law, California Attorney General Jerry Brown agrees that Proposition 8 should be struck down. The Attorney General’s office argued that the right to marry is an “inalienable right” that can not be selectively eliminated from one group without compelling reasons.
“The Court has a solemn responsibility to enforce our state constitution and to protect the rights of all people, regardless of popular opinion,” said Elizabeth Gill, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California. “This case isn’t just about marriage, and it’s certainly not just about gay and lesbian couples. If the Court strikes down Proposition 8, it will be protecting the civil rights of all Californians.”
An unprecedented 43 friend-of-the-court briefs, representing hundreds of religious organizations, civil rights groups, and labor unions, and numerous California municipal governments, bar associations, and leading legal scholars, were filed in the case, urging the court to strike down the initiative. Because the issues at stake have such important implications for other minority groups, Raymond Marshall of Bingham McCutchen, who represents the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the California State Conference of the NAACP, the Equal Justice Society, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, asked and was given permission to appear in court today. He argued that allowing Proposition 8 to stand could be detrimental to other minority groups who could easily become the targets of initiative campaigns seeking to take away their rights.
“Our state Constitution was created to ensure equal treatment under the law for every Californian,” said Geoff Kors, Executive Director of Equality California. “Prop 8 changes that fact by taking away a fundamental freedom from one particular group and mandating government discrimination against a minority. We hope the court upholds the Constitution’s promise of equality.”
The National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU are representing Equality California, whose members include many same-sex couples who married between June 16 and November 4, 2008, and six same-sex couples who want to marry in California. The arguments today also included two other challenges filed on the same day: one filed by the City and County of San Francisco (joined by Santa Clara County and the City of Los Angeles, and subsequently by Los Angeles County and other local governments); and another filed by a private attorney.
Serving as co-counsel on the case with NCLR, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU are the Law Office of David C. Codell, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.
The case is Strauss et al. v. Horton et al. (#S168047). For more information, go to: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm
The California Supreme Court must issue its decisions within 90 days of oral argument.
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/attorneys-urg…
Following Attorney General Investigation, Arizona-based Antigay Adoption Service Stops Business in New York: Lambda Legal’s Clients Vindicated
The Attorney General’s announcement follows a complaint filed by Lambda Legal on behalf of a New York gay couple barred from posting their on-line adoptive-parent profile by the companies in question solely because they are a same-sex couple. Adoption Profiles, LLC and Adoption Media, LLC were violating New York laws prohibiting such discrimination.
“New York Attorney General Cuomo has sent a clear message to all businesses that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation will not be tolerated,” said Flor Bermudez, Staff Attorney at Lambda Legal. “Companies can’t come into New York and hang a sign on their door saying ‘Same-sex couples need not apply.’”
Lambda Legal clients Rosario Gennaro and Alexander Gardner knew for a long time that they wanted to have children and that adoption was the way to make it possible. The couple had a home study by a licensed social worker and obtained certification as Qualified Adoptive Parents from the New York City Surrogate Court. The couple wanted to post their profile on ParentProfiles.com and seek a match with a birth parent. However, the website’s eligibility requirements only allow a “Qualifying Husband and Wife Couple” that are “one male husband and one female wife” to use the service, thus discriminating against same-sex couples on the basis of sexual orientation, sex and marital status. The company was sued in California for violating that state’s antidiscrimination law and is no longer doing business there.
“We are thrilled that the New York Attorney General’s office made the right decision and that no couple will have to experience what we did in our effort to become parents,” said Rosario Gennaro.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/following-att…
Lambda Legal and ARCW File Federal Lawsuit on Behalf of HIV Positive Woman Denied Surgery by Healthcare Provider
(Milwaukee, WI, February 12, 2009) — Lambda Legal and the AIDS Resource Center of Wisconsin (ARCW) filed a federal lawsuit today in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin on behalf of Melody Rose, a 35-year-old Wisconsin woman who was denied surgery to remove her gallbladder because she has HIV.
“Discrimination in healthcare remains a major problem for people living with HIV,” said Peter Kimball, Director of the Legal Services Program at the AIDS Resource Center of Wisconsin (ARCW). “In violation of both federal and Wisconsin law, Dr. Steven Cahee refused to provide needed medical treatment to our client, Melody Rose.”
Lambda Legal and ARCW represent Melody Rose who experienced health problems with her gallbladder while incarcerated at Taycheedah Correctional Institution in Fond du Lac. Ultimately, her physician referred her to Dr. Steven Cahee at the Fond du Lac Regional Hospital to have her gall bladder removed.
However, Dr. Cahee refused to perform the surgery after learning Ms. Rose is HIV-positive. Some time thereafter, a surgeon at a different medical facility removed Ms. Rose’s gallbladder in a laprascopic procedure, which is considered routine surgery.
“Dr. Cahee’s actions fly in the face of ethical behavior for a medical professional,” said Scott Schoettes, Staff Attorney with Lambda Legal’s HIV Project. “Long ago, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention established that using universal precautions — which are required in all sorts of medical situations, including surgeries — makes it extremely unlikely for the virus to be transmitted in this setting.”
The complaint filed today alleges that the defendants –- Steven M. Cahee, M.D., Agnesian HealthCare, Inc., and Fond du Lac Regional Clinic, S.C., violated four different state and federal laws. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and its state law counterpart, which both prohibit disability discrimination by places of public accommodation (including healthcare providers); the Rehabilitation Act, which requires recipients of federal financial assistance not to discriminate against people with disabilities; and a Wisconsin law addressing HIV discrimination specifically, which forbids healthcare providers from denying services to people (or humiliating and degrading them) based solely on their HIV status.
The case is Rose v. Cahee, et al.
Scott Schoettes, HIV Project Staff Attorney, is handling the case for Lambda Legal. He is joined by co-counsel Peter Kimball, of AIDS Resource Center of Wisconsin.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/lambda-legal-…
ACLU Sues Nassau County Schools to Enforce Right of Gay Straight Alliance to Meet at Yulee High School and Yulee Middle School
The SBNC superintendent said in a letter denying access to the GSA that groups with names referencing a specific sexual orientation would not be recognized and that even if the group changed its name to one not communicating a gay-specific mission, approval was uncertain.
“We just want the club so that straight and gay kids can get together to talk about harassment and discrimination against gay kids in an open environment. The school is discriminating against us and that’s exactly the kind of thing we want to talk about and prevent,” said Hannah Page, ACLU plaintiff and student at Yulee High School. “Other clubs and groups are allowed to meet on campus and we have that right too.”Bullying of LGBT students in Nassau County Schools is a serious problem. Plaintiffs Hannah Page and Jacob Brock, who are gay, report that students have threatened to beat them up based on their sexual orientation, and both are routinely called derogatory names at school.
GSAs are student organizations made up of straight and gay students who wish to advocate for an end to bullying, harassment, and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (“LGBT”) students. There are over 4,000 GSAs in the U.S., according to the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN).
The federal Equal Access Act requires schools to grant access and official recognition to a GSA (and most other student groups) if the school allows any extracurricular groups to meet on campus. SBNC denied the Yulee GSA access and official recognition even though other student organizations, such as the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, meet regularly at YHS and YMS.
“We are taking a stand today because gay students are entitled to a safe and secure education. Gay and lesbian students deserve schools that heed the rule of law,” said Robert Rosenwald, Director of the ACLU of Florida’s LGBT Advocacy Project. “These students are trying to bring a message of equality and openness, and the lesson they are being taught is that
Yulee High School administrators believe discrimination against LGBT students is an acceptable policy. Discrimination and harassment by students will never end as long as schools discriminate themselves.”
The ACLU filed the suit alleging violations of the First Amendment and the Federal Equal Access Act, and seeks a preliminary injunction to force school officials to allow the GSA to meet at Yulee High School while the litigation makes its way to trial.
The ACLU of Florida recently won a similar federal case when school officials in Okeechobee, Florida refused to allow a GSA to meet at Okeechobee High School. The judge ruled that schools must provide for the well-being of gay students and cannot discriminate against the GSA. The Okeechobee County School Board paid $326,000.00 in attorneys’ fees for refusing to follow the law in that case. You can read more about the Okeechobee case at: http://www.aclufl.org/news_events/?action=viewRelease&emailAlertID=3654
The lawsuit was filed today in the Jacksonville Division of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Robert Rosenwald, director of the ACLU of Florida’s LGBT Advocacy Project, is lead counsel for the ACLU’s case, Gay-Straight Alliance of Yulee High School v. School Board of Nassau County. LGBT Advocacy Project staff attorney Shelbi Day, ACLU of Florida legal director Randall Marshall, and associate legal director Maria Kayanan will also represent the plaintiffs.
A copy of the Complaint can be viewed at: http://www.aclufl.org/pdfs/YuleeComplaint.pdf
A copy of the motion for preliminary injunction can be viewed at: http://www.aclufl.org/pdfs/YuleePI.pdf
Students can learn more about their rights by downloading a free copy of the ACLU of Florida’s Student Rights Handbook at: www.aclufl.org.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/aclu-sues-nas…
On Valentine’s Day, Binational Gay and Lesbian Couples Struggle to Stay Together
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Immigration Equality, the national group aimed at ending anti-LGBT discrimination in immigration law, and the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, lauded today’s introduction of the Uniting American Families Act. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), will provide lesbian and gay Americans the same opportunity as different-sex couples to sponsor their partner for immigration purposes. During a media conference call, Rep. Nadler joined Immigration Equality Executive Director Rachel B. Tiven, HRC President Joe Solmonese, and Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund Legislative Staff Attorney John Amaya to discuss the importance of this legislation, along with two binational couples who face the prospect of being forcibly separated under existing immigration laws.
“It should be an outrage to all Americans that our government continues to deny one set of citizens the fundamental rights enjoyed by the rest of its citizens,” said Rep. Nadler. “It is time that we as a society finally acknowledge that a committed, loving family is a committed, loving family, no matter whether a couple is gay or straight. It makes no difference. We should be encouraging and rewarding stable families rather than sweeping them into the margins. We must now pass UAFA, the Uniting American Families Act, and grant gay and lesbian binational families the same legal protections—and the same human dignity—as other Americans.”
“Like many people across the country, there are Vermonters whose partners are foreign nationals and who feel abandoned by our laws in this area. The promotion of family unity has long been part of federal immigration policy, and we should honor that principle by providing all Americans the opportunity to be with their loved ones. I hope all Senators will join me in supporting equality for all Americans and their loved ones,” said Sen. Leahy.
Under U.S. immigration law, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses for immigration purposes. But gay and lesbian Americans are not afforded this basic right. Consequently, many binational gay and lesbian couples are kept or torn apart. The Uniting American Families Act would allow U.S. citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their same-sex partners for family-based immigration by meeting the same standard as different-sex couples. The bill would impose harsh penalties for fraud, including up to five years in prison and as much as $250,000 in fines.
“This Valentine’s Day, thousands of gay and lesbian Americans who have fallen in love across borders must grapple with an impossible choice between being with the person they love and staying in their country,” said Immigration Equality Executive Director Rachel B. Tiven. “These couples simply want the same opportunity to prove that their families deserve to stay together.”
“For far too long, our elected officials have ignored the devastating real-life consequences that current immigration policies have had on thousands of gay and lesbian couples in loving, committed relationships,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “We thank Representative Nadler and Senator Leahy for their leadership to ensure that these couples are treated equally under the law. We commend Immigration Equality for their continued leadership in fighting this unjust policy.”
This inequality affects more than 36,000 gay and lesbian Americans, according to the 2000 Census and research commissioned by Immigration Equality and conducted by Gary Gates of the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Audio of the call held today can be accessed at http://www.immigrationequality.org/blog/ and http://www.hrcbackstory.org.
Immigration Equality is the only national organization devoted to fighting for equal treatment under U.S. immigration law for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive immigrants and their families and to winning asylum for LGBT and HIV-positive people fleeing persecution.
The Human Rights Campaign is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against LGBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/on-valentines…
