Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

Federal district court judge rules that the ban on transgender military servicemembers can’t be implemented yet

Transgender Rights

The Pentagon. Attribution: Wikipedia
The Pentagon. Attribution: Wikipedia
The Washington Blade reports:

In a development that could complicate the implementation of the transgender military ban, a federal judge in D.C. ruled the Trump administration is “incorrect” in determining no legal impediment remains in place barring enforcement of the policy.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton appointee, issued a notice Tuesday asserting her injunction remains in place for the time being despite an order from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals vacating the decision.

“Lacking a mandate, the D.C. Circuit’s judgment is not final, and this court’s preliminary injunction remains in place,” Kollar-Kotelly writes.

The plaintiffs can still ask for rehearing by the three-judge panel or rehearing with the full set of DC Circuit judges and both options would extend the time before the mandate issues. The earliest date the mandate could go into effect is March 29, but that would only happen if no rehearing request is made.

Equality Case Files has more, including a link to the order.

UPDATE 3/20: The DOJ has filed a request with the district court to stay its injunction against the ban. The motion also suggests they’re going to file a similar request in the DC Circuit.

41 Comments Leave a Comment

  • 1. VIRick  |  March 19, 2019 at 8:34 pm

    National Morena Party Cracks Down on Freeloaders Refusing National Policy

    Per Reporte Alacrán:

    In Nuevo León:

    La Comisión Nacional de Honestidad y Justicia de Morena cancela registro de Juan Carlos Leal Segovia en Nuevo León por su ideología hacia el matrimonio igualitario y aborto.
    https://twitter.com/AlacranReporte

    The National Commission of Honesty and Justice of Morena cancels registration of Juan Carlos Leal Segovia in Nuevo León for his negative attitude opposing equal marriage and abortion. (He is a current member of the Nuevo León state Congress.)

    In Durango:

    En Durango, el Tribunal Electoral Estatal revoca registro a Morena para Otniel Garcia Navarro y Silvestre Flores de los Santos.

    In Durango, the State Electoral Tribunal revokes the registration to Morena for Otniel Garcia Navarro and Silvestre Flores de los Santos. (Both were seeking to be Morena candidates for mayor of Ciudad Durango.)
    https://twitter.com/AlacranReporte

    All 3 cited above have been officially expelled from Morena.

  • 2. VIRick  |  March 19, 2019 at 8:48 pm

    Edomex: Morena to Present Marriage Equality Initiative

    Per Gonzalo Kinich:

    El jueves, el 21 de marzo 2019, la bancada de Morena en Congreso del Estado de México presentará iniciativa para aprobar matrimonio igualitario.
    https://twitter.com/Kiwi_lloron

    On Thursday, 21 March 2019, the Morena caucus in the State of Mexico Congress will present an initiative to approve marriage equality.

  • 3. JayJonson  |  March 20, 2019 at 7:05 am

    From a NYTimes review by Adam Cohen of a new book on Chief Justice Roberts by Joan Biskupic:

    "Roberts has been particularly meanspirited in gay rights cases. When the court decided Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark ruling recognizing a constitutional right to marry for same-sex couples, Roberts wrote a dissent comparing it to the infamous Dred Scott decision, which rejected an enslaved man’s suit for freedom. Even Richard Posner, a court of appeals judge nominated by Reagan, called Roberts’s dissent “heartless.”'
    . . . .

    "Barack Obama, who taught constitutional law and is a keen judge of character, identified it when, as a senator, he was one of the 22 Democrats who voted against confirming Roberts. “When I examined Judge Roberts’s record and history of public service,” Obama said, “it is my personal estimation that he has far more often used his formidable skills on behalf of the strong in opposition to the weak.”'

    Roberts, in fact, regularly opposes the rights of blacks, gay people, the poor and other relatively powerless groups. "
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/18/books/review/j

  • 4. VIRick  |  March 20, 2019 at 12:51 pm

    Puerto Rico: Governor to Issue Executive Order Banning "Conversion Therapy" for Minors

    On Tuesday, 19 March 2019, Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló said he will issue an executive order that will ban so-called conversion therapy for minors in the US commonwealth. It remains unclear when Rosselló will issue the order, but he told reporters during a press conference that conversion therapy has “zero scientific basis and causes significant damage.”

    After having already passed the Puerto Rico Senate, on 18 March 2019, members of the New Progressive Party, a pro-statehood party that Rosselló chairs, blocked a vote in the Puerto Rico House of Representatives on a bill that would have banned "conversion therapy" for minors on the island. Latino Rebels reported two Puerto Rican lawmakers, Reps. Jorge Navarro and Juan Oscar Morales, told a local newspaper they support "conversion therapy."
    https://www.washingtonblade.com/2019/03/20/puerto

  • 5. guitaristbl  |  March 21, 2019 at 9:17 am

    An interesting article on fivethirtyeight on the perception of discrimination against LGBT People in the US in 2019 :
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/fewer-americ

  • 6. VIRick  |  March 21, 2019 at 4:08 pm

    Edomex: Morena Proposal to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage Submitted

    Per Diputados Morena Edomex:

    Nuestra obligación como diputados es garantizar los derechos para todas las personas, motivo por el que, el 21 de marzo 2019, nuestro compañero legislador, Tanech Sánchez Angeles, propuso modificar el Código Civil y permitir el matrimonio y concubinato entre personas del mismo sexo en el Edoméx.
    https://twitter.com/GPMorenaEdomex/status/1108826

    Our duty as deputies is to guarantee rights for all people, which is why, on 21 March 2019, our fellow legislator, Tanech Sánchez Angeles, proposed modifying the Civil Code to allow both same-sex marriage and cohabitation in Edoméx.

    Note: It would appear that the new Morena initiative skips over that portion of the similar PRD proposal, which they rejected, but which would have also allowed same-sex couples to adopt. Since Morena holds an absolute majority of the seats in the Edomex Congress, even without assistance from either PRD or PT, this modified measure ought to finally pass, allowing for marriage but not adoption.

  • 7. VIRick  |  March 21, 2019 at 5:04 pm

    Two More Native American Tribes Recognize Same-Sex Marriage

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    Ponca Tribe of Nebraska

    The Domestic Relations Code of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska in its version published on 5 November 2018 stated in Section 4-2-1.1 that the purpose of that code is to "ensure that couples of the same sex and couples of opposite sex have equal access to marriage," which was decided by the Tribal Council at a previous meeting on 26 August 2018.
    https://twitter.com/LGBTMarriage/status/110878293

    Blue Lake Rancheria, CA

    The Blue Lake Rancheria legalized same-sex marriage on 1 November 2013 by repealing §6C of its Marriage Ordinance. Previously, on 13 October 2001, the Business Council of the Rancheria had passed an ordinance which at §6C prohibits marriages contracted by same-sex parties. However, at §13, it states that marriages legally contracted outside the boundaries of the Blue Lake Rancheria are valid within the tribal jurisdiction. (Strictly speaking, this is not new news, but rather, is a point which was not previously recorded.) For a complete list, see:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_u

    Wikipedia now lists 42 tribes which provide for explicit legal recognition of same-sex marriage performed within tribal jurisdiction, 36 more which provide explicit recognition to all marriages performed elsewhere in the state, an additional 13 which have gender-neutral marriage language, plus 19 which have it due to federal courts (CFR Courts through the Bureau of Indian Affairs), and 11 more which (due to hazy language) may have same-sex marriage, for a total of 121. (We are also aware that two more, the Tlingit and Haida tribes of Alaska, legalized same-sex marriage in 2015.)

    In addition, many federally-recognized tribal jurisdictions do not have their own courts, relying instead on CFR courts under the Bureau of Indian Affairs. In such cases, same-sex marriage is legal under federal law. Others do have their own courts and legal codes but do not have separate marriage laws or licensing, relying instead on state law (many small tribes, exact number unknown, simply rely on state law). Of those that do have their own legislation, most have no special regulation for marriages between people of the same sex or gender, and many accept as valid marriages performed in other jurisdictions.

    Only 12 tribes specifically ban same-sex marriage, and 5 more use gender specific language without mentioning recognition from other jurisdictions, for a total of 17.

    There are a total of 573 federally-recognized Native American tribes, of which 231 are located in Alaska, and 342 in the lower 48.

    Of the 23 largest tribes by population (outside of Alaska and Oklahoma), only 2 specifically ban same-sex marriage, the Navajo Nation and the Gila River tribe, both in Arizona. Of the 18 largest tribes by population in Oklahoma, 5 explicitly ban same-sex marriage, the Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Potawatomi, and Seminole, while a sixth, the Miami, is unclear. Wikipedia has not attempted a similar break-down of the Alaska tribes.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_u

    The others which specifically ban same-sex marriage (all smaller groupings) are the Bay Mills Indian Community of Washington, the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa of Michigan, the Kalispel Indian Community of Washington, the Lummi Nation of Washington, and the Nez Perce of Idaho.

  • 8. VIRick  |  March 21, 2019 at 9:45 pm

    Texas: Nut-Job Hate Group Drops Its Federal Suit against City of Austin

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 19 March 2019, in "US Pastor Council v. City of Austin," the nut-job hate group's federal challenge to the city's employment non-discrimination ordinance, with the spurious claim that it lacks sufficient religious exemptions, the US Pastor Council has voluntarily dismissed its own federal lawsuit against the City of Austin.

    Notice of Dismissal is here:
    http://bit.ly/2Fi6chv

  • 9. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 11:32 am

    California: Transgender Man Denied Healthcare Based on Hospital's Religious Views

    Twenty-seven year old Oliver Knight was lying on a gurney in a pre-surgical holding area on 30 August 2017, an IV drip hooked up waiting for the general anesthetic to be administered. He was completely prepped for his life-changing hysterectomy procedure when his surgeon informed him that the hospital’s executive administrators had canceled his surgery. The reason for the surgical cancellation is detailed in a 12-page civil lawsuit filed 21 March 2019 in Superior Court for Humboldt County CA by Knight, a transman, against St. Joseph Hospital, located in Eureka.

    In a phone call with the "Los Angeles Blade" on Thursday, 21 March, ACLU Foundation of Northern California’s Elizabeth Gill, who is representing Knight, now 29, say the hospital claimed that because Knight is transgender, the surgery conflicted with the hospital’s adherence to Catholic doctrine and beliefs. St. Joseph Hospital is part of the Providence St. Joseph Health Network, a national, Catholic not-for-profit health system, one of the largest health systems in the country, operating 51 hospitals, with over 25,000 physicians. The network operates 18 hospitals in California.

    Gill says that Knight being denied healthcare based on the hospital’s religious views—which does not recognize gender-affirming care—is a violation of California’s public accommodations laws governed by California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. However, she points out, the hospital regularly allows hysterectomies for patients who are not trans. Additionally, Knight’s physician said he and other physicians regularly perform the healthcare procedure, making it clear that that the denial was discriminatory based solely on Knight being trans.
    https://www.losangelesblade.com/2019/03/21/transg

    Per Equality Case Files:

    The case, filed by the ACLU on 21 March 2019, is "Knight v. St. Joseph Health," and was filed in Humboldt County Superior Court (California state court).

    The Complaint is here:
    https://www.aclunc.org/docs/KnightvStJosephHealth

    The ACLU press release is here:
    https://www.aclunc.org/news/aclu-sues-st-joseph-h

  • 10. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 11:43 am

    Kenya: Appeals Court Rejects Bid to Ban LGBT NGO

    The Kenya Court of Appeal has rejected a bid to block the National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission from registering as an NGO (non-governmental organisation). Laws in Kenya require all non-profit groups to register with the NGO Coordination Board, but the board had rejected the group’s application in 2015 because it caters to LGBT+ people.
    
    In a ruling issued on Friday, 22 March 2019, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal by the NGO Coordination Board, which sought to deny LGBT+ Kenyans the right to associate. In a 3-2 decision, the appeals court found that LGBT+ people have a right to form an NGO, agreeing with an earlier High Court ruling that stated blocking them from doing so is a denial of their fundamental rights.
    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/03/22/kenya-appea

  • 11. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 12:30 pm

    Michigan: State to Quit Allowing State-Funded Agencies to Turn Away LGBT Adoptees

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 22 March 2019, in "Dumont v. Gordon," the federal case challenging the Michigan practice of allowing state-funded agencies to use religion to turn away foster/adoptive parents based on sexual orientation, the suit has been voluntarily dismissed following a settlement agreement between the state and the plaintiffs. The order on dismissal, with the court retaining jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, is here:
    http://bit.ly/2Fq6pPR

    The terms of the agreement attached to the Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal are here:
    http://files.eqcf.org/cases/217-cv-13080-82/

    (Exhibit A as to why one must elect Democrats.)

  • 12. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 12:45 pm

    Wisconsin: State Reverses Itself on Obfuscating against LGBT Rights

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Yesterday, 21 March 2019, a state court judge blocked a set of laws passed late last year by a lame-duck session of the state's legislature, laws that weakened the authority of the state’s newly-elected Democratic Governor and Attorney-General. More on that here:
    https://nyti.ms/2uwiOwJ

    Almost immediately thereafter, AG Josh Kaul filed motions to remove the state from lawsuits challenging the Affordable Care Act. This includes filings in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and in the Texas federal district court to remove the state from "Franciscan Alliance," the challenge to the ACA's non-discrimination provisions. The AG's statement is here, which includes links to the court filings:
    https://www.doj.state.wi.us/news-releases/ag-kaul

    The state also joined the plaintiffs in a stipulation to dismiss the state's appeal to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in "Flack v. Wisconsin Dept. of Health Services," the case challenging the state's Medicaid coverage exclusion for transition-related health care. The appeal is only as to a preliminary injunction requiring coverage for the two named plaintiffs. The case continues in district court, where plaintiffs are seeking class certification for all Wisconsin Medicaid beneficiaries. The motion for a class-wide preliminary injunction is pending.

    The Stipulated Dismissal, dated 21 March 2019, is here:
    http://files.eqcf.org/cases/18-2861-20/

    (Exhibits B and C as to why one must elect Democrats.)

  • 13. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 2:52 pm

    Alabama: State Senate Approves Measure to End Issuance of Marriage Licenses

    Under a bill approved 26-0 by the Alabama Senate on Thursday, 21 March 2019, couples who want to marry would obtain and fill out a form at their county courthouse, but it would not be called a marriage license. Instead, probate judges, the county officials who have traditionally granted licenses, would simply record the form rather than issue a license.

    The bill, which now goes to the state’s House of Representatives, is an accommodation to bigoted, conservative probate judges, some of whom have ceased issuing marriage licenses to any couples in order to avoid approving them for same-sex couples.

    Republican Sen. Greg Albritton, the measure’s chief sponsor, has put forth the same measure in several sessions since the US Supreme Court’s 2015 marriage equality ruling. The Senate has passed it previously, but it has always died in the House.
    https://www.advocate.com/politics/2019/3/22/middl

  • 14. FredDorner  |  March 22, 2019 at 2:53 pm

    Good things happen when the Dems are in charge.

  • 15. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 3:21 pm

    Edomex: Naucalpan Continues to Move Forward on Marriage Equality

    Per Temístocles Villanueva‏:

    El día de hoy, el 21 de marzo 2019, acompañé a mi compañero y aliado en la lucha, Rodrigo Gómez Orta (Morena), regidor de Naucalpan, a la sesión de la Comisión de Derechos Humanos donde presentó el proyecto de resolución que faculta al registro civil a celebrar matrimonios igualitarios.
    https://twitter.com/TemistoclesVR

    Today, 21 March 2019, I accompanied my comrade and ally in the struggle, Rodrigo Gómez Orta (Morena), council member of Naucalpan, to the session of the Human Rights Commission where he presented the draft resolution that empowers the civil registry to celebrate equal marriages.

    Temístocles Villanueva (Morena) is an openly gay member of the CDMX legislative assembly.

  • 16. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 3:47 pm

    Tennessee House Advances Anti-LGBT "License to Discriminate" Bill

    Tennessee legislators have advanced what proponents are calling an anti-discrimination bill that in reality could undermine anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people.

    On Thursday, 21 March 2019, the state’s House of Representatives approved HB 563, which would prevent state or local governments from taking a company’s internal policies into consideration when making contracts or grants, or changing tax treatment, Nashville newspaper, "The Tennessean," reports. It means that these governments could not, for instance, require that companies they do business with have LGBTQ-inclusive antidiscrimination policies — or offer health insurance or family leave or any number of other policies or benefits.

    A companion bill in the Senate has yet to receive a committee hearing, so whether the measure will become law is far from certain. Similar legislation failed last year.
    https://www.advocate.com/politics/2019/3/22/tenne

    In addition, on Wednesday, 20 March 2019, the House Judiciary Committee approved another measure in the "slate of hate," HB 836, which would allow faith-based foster care and adoption agencies to deny child placement “when the proposed placement would violate the agency’s written religious or moral convictions or policies.” This would apply even to agencies that hold state contracts and would mean that they could turn away LGBTQ people, members of different faiths, interfaith couples, single people, and any other prospective parent who somehow offends their religious beliefs. The bill now goes to the House Calendar and Rules Committee for scheduling on the House floor.

  • 17. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 4:51 pm

    Ecuador: Judge Calls Public Hearing on Marriage Equality Case before Constitutional Court

    Per Jacqueline Rodas:

    Juez constitucional Ramiro Ávila convoca a audiencia pública sobre matrimonio igualitario (caso 0011-18-CN) el próximo 29 de marzo.
    https://twitter.com/JacquelineRodas/status/110918

    Constitutional judge Ramiro Ávila has called a public hearing on equal marriage (case 0011-18-CN) on 29 March 2019.

  • 18. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 5:33 pm

    Veracruz: Municipality of San Rafael Pays for Amparos for Same-Sex Couples

    Per José Ortiz Medina:

    El Ayuntamiento (y el alcalde) de San Rafael (en el estado de Veracruz) paga amparo a bodas gay rechazadas en el Registro Civil (para todas las parejas del mismo sexo desde cualquier lugar).
    https://twitter.com/pepeortiz13

    The City Council (and the mayor) of San Rafael (in Veracruz state) pays for amparo for same-sex weddings rejected by the Civil Registry (for all same-sex couples from anywhere).
    https://www.versiones.com.mx/ayuntamiento-de-san-

    Note: Some time ago, the municipality of San Rafael officially declared itself to be "gay friendly." Now, the city is proving the point, taking public money to pay the court to tell the civil registry to do its job. (In effect, the left hand is paying the right hand to tell a third party what to do, a true scenario of Mexico-in-action.)

    San Rafael, in the northern part of the state, was founded in the early 19th century by French immigrants, whose many progressive descendants still dominate local politics, and who have made their town a literal "France in Mexico."

    It is extraordinary that it is requiring local officials in places like Naucalpan and San Rafael to intervene in their respective states in the enforcement of the 2015 Supreme Court jurisprudence, while state officials dither, obfuscate, and procrastinate.

  • 19. arturo547  |  March 22, 2019 at 9:11 pm

    With the new high-quality judges of the Ecuador Constitutional Court it seems that they will favour lgbtttiq marriage. In summary, we should be expecting good news from Ecuador and Peru’a Courts. I have no idea about the ideological leanings of the Honduran and Panama’s supreme Court judges. They seem to be conservative. On the other hand, marriage equality will be a reality in Chile (but we’ll have to wait a lot of time).

    About Venezuela we don’t know anything about the marriage equality case. That’s sad because the Supreme Court judges have been reported favour marriage equality (8-1). Only one of the judges is against.

  • 20. VIRick  |  March 22, 2019 at 10:08 pm

    Arturo, in Ecuador, I am confused as to which marriage equality case is under appeal by the mere numerical reference to Case 0011-18-CN. The review was admitted before the Constitutional Court on 6 March 2019 from El Tribunal de la Sala Penal de la Corte Superior de Justicia de Pichincha (Quito). That court wants to know if the Consultive Opinion of the CIDH, OC-24/17 (the marriage equality ruling), is constitutional and applicable to Ecuador without amending Article 67 of Ecuador's Constitution. It is in that light that Constitutional Judge Ramiro Ávila Santamaria has called the public hearing for 29 March 2019.

    However, if anything, I would have thought that this matter under review would have come from El Tribunal de la Sala Civil de la Corte Superior de Justicia del Azuay (the jurisdiction of the Cuenca cases). Instead, it pertains to a different case from a different court, one about which we have not been following (and not Pamela Troya's case from Quito, either, because if it were, Pamela would have been the one making the announcement, not the journalist, Jacqueline Rodas). The entire court notice (in Spanish) can be found here:
    https://twitter.com/JacquelineRodas

  • 21. VIRick  |  March 24, 2019 at 10:35 am

    El Salvador: Pro-Equal-Marriage Anglican Bishop Dies

    Per ElSalvadorG.com:‏

    Descanse en paz, obispo Martin Barahona, de la Iglesia Anglicana de El Salvador, el primer religioso en el país en haberse expresado publicamente a favor del matrimonio igualitario en El Salvador.
    https://twitter.com/elsalvadorg_sv

    Rest in peace, Bishop Martin Barahona, of the Anglican Church of El Salvador, the first religious in the country to have expressed himself publicly in favor of marriage equality in El Salvador.

  • 22. JayJonson  |  March 24, 2019 at 10:39 am

    Sometimes dreams come true.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/fashion/weddin

  • 23. VIRick  |  March 24, 2019 at 10:50 am

    Paraguay: Senate Declares Itself to Be Pro-Life and Pro-Family

    Per Radio Marandú:

    Paraguay: Cámara de Senadores Se Declara Pro-Vida y Pro-Familia

    El 22 de marzo 2019, la Cámara de Senadores aprobó un proyecto de declaración por el cual se declara pro-vida y pro-familia. La normativa se basa en los Artículos 4 y 49 de la Constitución Nacional para rechazar el aborto y el matrimonio igualitario.
    http://www.radiomarandu.com.py/2019/03/22/camara-

    On 22 March 2019, the Senate approved a draft declaration by which it declares itself pro-life and pro-family. The regulations are based on Articles 4 and 49 of the National Constitution to reject abortion and marriage equality.

    Note: As a sub-heading, file this news under the title, "The Ass-Hole of South America Strikes Again." Actually, given how far its immediate neighbors have moved on both issues, politicians in Paraguay are running scared, given that both matters have rapidly jumped to the forefront of discussion there.

    Still, this measure further underlines how women's rights (abortion) continue to be tied together with LGBT rights (marriage equality) in the more retrograde parts of Latin America, particularly in the minds of the haters.

  • 24. bayareajohn  |  March 24, 2019 at 5:35 pm

    Paywall… can you summarize what this is about?

  • 25. VIRick  |  March 24, 2019 at 8:36 pm

    A gay couple was just married at City Hall in San Francisco. Both, apparently, are current residents there. The one is a doctor, a second-generation immigrant whose father moved from rural Taiwan to South Dakota and who pushed education on his kids. The other is a first-generation immigrant from Georgia (the ex-Soviet country), and an entrepreneur, who immigrated to Maine/Vermont on his own, on boarding school/college scholarships, and who also has a father who pushed education, perhaps even more.

    Twins are already on the way, one for each newly-wed father, but with the same surrogate, with the idea of having kids being a paramount reason for the two to marry each other, an arguable point, but for this couple, one which seems to work. A side portion details the insane expense involved.

    Basically, it's a story of "only in the USA could such happen," a point which is a somewhat thread-bare exaggeration, but which, for this couple, also seems to work. The story also emphasizes the implausibility of their ever finding each other, a so-called "perfect" match, given how "picky" both seem to be, and how far each has travelled in their lives.

  • 26. ianbirmingham  |  March 24, 2019 at 9:05 pm

    Bohemian Rhapsody premieres in China — but without any references to Freddie Mercury's homosexuality

    Blockbuster Freddie Mercury biopic Bohemian Rhapsody opened in China over the weekend in a limited number of arthouse cinemas, but the release has been heavily censored to remove any mention of the Queen singer's sexuality, or his later AIDS diagnosis.

    For example: an important scene where Mercury comes out as bisexual to his then-girlfriend Mary Austin — resulting in the end of their relationship — was completely cut, leaving viewers wondering why the couple broke up.

    Feili Xie, a 28-year-old gay man from Beijing who was a big fan of the film, told ABC that while he was in favour of Bohemian Rhapsody being screened in China, he was disappointed about the "devious treatment" censors gave the film.

    "It is seriously and obviously out of context, where many scenes in the film didn't make any sense at all," he said.

    All references to Mercury's homosexuality, both explicit and implied, were removed from the film. Even a shot where Mercury, played by Oscar-winner Rami Malek, held a mic stand near his groin, was cut.

    Most of Mercury's interactions with his long-term partner Jim Hutton were absent, including a credits sequence with a historical photo of the pair.

    A scene featuring a recreation of the music video for Queen's 1984 single I Want to Break Free — which saw the band members dressed in women's clothing — was also removed in its entirety.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-25/bohemian-r

  • 27. VIRick  |  March 24, 2019 at 9:40 pm

    Baja California: In Tijuana, First Marriage between Two Women Is Verified

    Per La Jornada BC:

    Baja California: Se Verifica Primer Matrimonio entre Dos Mujeres en Tijuana

    Tijuana, 24 de marzo 2019 – Ayer al mediodía, en las oficinas del Registro Civil No. 01 de Tijuana, se llevó a cabo el primer matrimonio entre dos mujeres. Izzveth Madrigal contrajo nupcias con Gabriela Flores. No requirieron pagar amparo para hacer valer su derecho.

    El 17 de enero del año pasado, el Registro Civil de Baja California ordenó se acepte el matrimonio igualitario para estas dos mujeres, pareja a la que en octubre de 2017 se le había negado el trámite.
    http://jornadabc.mx/tijuana/24-03-2019/se-verific

    Tijuana, 24 March 2019 – Yesterday at noon, in the offices of the Civil Registry No. 01 of Tijuana, the first marriage between two women took place. Izzveth Madrigal contracted nuptials with Gabriela Flores. They were not required to pay for an amparo to enforce their rights.

    On 17 January 2018, the Civil Registry of Baja California was ordered to accept the equal marriage of these two women, a couple who in October 2017 had been denied the process.

    Note: In November 2017, the state government of Baja California announced that it had administratively altered its marriage requirements to allow same-sex couples to marry. Any number of male couples have already married in Tijuana without amparo. However, this apparently is the first female couple there to do so. The article does not explain why they waited over a year to complete the process.

  • 28. allan120102  |  March 24, 2019 at 10:54 pm

    Is not that easy. BC might not ask for amparos anymore but ss couples need to be protect by the comission of civil rights who writes to the registry and files for the couples to marry. It needs to be done everytime until the the municipality allows it. Not sure if all municipalities in BC are allowing it but this is from December 2018 and Ensenada is still with this method so ssm dont occur inmediately. http://jornadabc.mx/mexicali/30-12-2018/emite-ced

  • 29. VIRick  |  March 25, 2019 at 3:28 pm

    Thailand Elects Its First Transgender MP

    On Sunday, 24 March 2019, following the vote for members of parliament in the first election held since the 2014 military coup, Filmmaker Tanwarin Sukkhapisit, a transgender woman, has become the first transgender MP to be elected in Thailand. Tanwarin ran as a candidate with the Future Forward Party, a political force founded a year ago, and according to unofficial results quoted in the "Bangkok Post," one projected to become the third-largest party in the country.

    In a separate interview with the "Bangkok Post," Tanwarin said she would fight to legalize same-sex marriage in Thailand. Referring to section 1448 of the Civil and Commercial Code, which says that marriage can only be stipulated between a man and a woman, the new MP said: “We hope to amend it to say any two persons can be married. If this can be fixed, it would remove a barrier and open the doors to many other things.”
    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/03/25/thailand-fi

  • 30. VIRick  |  March 25, 2019 at 4:45 pm

    Brunei Introducing New, Harsh Anti-LGBT Laws

    Brunei is reportedly planning to introduce anti-LGBT laws next month that could see people whipped or stoned to death for same-sex activity. Currently, homosexuality is illegal in the east Asian country and punishable by up to ten years imprisonment.
    
    According to human rights groups, under the upcoming changes to Brunei’s penal code, punishments could include whipping and stoning to death for people found guilty of adultery, sodomy, and rape. The country introduced Islamic criminal law in 2014 when it announced the first of three stages to legal changes that included failing to pray on Friday or pregnancy outside of marriage. A subsequent backlash led to the final two stages being delayed, but the country now reportedly plans to introduce the changes on 3 April 2019.

    The Brunei Project, a human rights group, posted on social media: “The Brunei Project recently learnt that after years of continually delaying implementation of phases 2 and 3 of the Syariah Penal Code (SPC), the Brunei Government is now rushing through the final two phases concurrently, with the laws scheduled to take effect on 3 April 2019. While this means that the Government is breaking its promise to implement the laws in three distinct phases, with a grace period between each phase, what is even more alarming is the secrecy with which it is doing so."

    According to one source, there is an existing ban on the local media reporting on the implementation of the SPC. Thus, as of the current moment, most people in Brunei remain unaware that the SPC is scheduled to be fully implemented in less than two weeks. Among the punishments will be the amputation of limbs for theft, the death penalty for apostasy, and a range of punishments for those found guilty of engaging in sexual activity with members of the same gender, as well as for adultery.
    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/03/25/brunei-ston

  • 31. VIRick  |  March 25, 2019 at 5:33 pm

    8th Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Anti-Transgender Suit

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 25 March 2019, in "Calgaro v. St. Louis County," the case before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals wherein which a mother was suing her transgender daughter and those who assisted her daughter's gender-affirming treatments, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the district court's dismissal of the mother's lawsuit.

    • Opinion is here:
    http://files.eqcf.org/cases/17-2279-13695352/
    • Judgment is here:
    http://files.eqcf.org/cases/17-2279-13695376/

  • 32. scream4ever  |  March 25, 2019 at 5:38 pm

    God I'm so glad. This bitch gave my home county a bad rep.

  • 33. VIRick  |  March 25, 2019 at 6:00 pm

    And that reminds me that we should note that this case originated from St. Louis County, Minnesota, NOT St. Louis County, Missouri.

  • 34. VIRick  |  March 25, 2019 at 6:06 pm

    Colorado Lawmakers Approve Ban on LGBT "Conversion Therapy"

    On Monday, 25 March 2019, the state Senate passed House Bill 1129, which prohibits state-licensed mental health professionals from subjecting anyone under age 18 to the discredited practice, designed to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

    The House of Representatives first passed the bill on 19 February, and it now goes back to that chamber for approval of some language slightly amended by the Senate. Then, it goes to Gov. Jared Polis, the first out gay man to be elected governor of any state. Polis previously pledged that he would ban the practice if elected governor and is now expected to sign.
    https://www.advocate.com/politics/2019/3/25/color

  • 35. scream4ever  |  March 25, 2019 at 6:13 pm

    Indeed I'm from Duluth, MN.

  • 36. VIRick  |  March 25, 2019 at 7:06 pm

    Edomex: Naucalpan Commissioners Vote to Approve Marriage Equality

    Per Frente Queretano por el DNDEL:

    Hoy, el 25 de marzo 2019, con 10 votos a favor y 3 en contra, se aprueba en comisiones unidas el punto de acuerdo para permitir el matrimonio igualitario en Naucalpan!!! Naucalpan se dirige a ser el primer municipio del Estado de México en no pedir amparo para celebrar matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo.
    https://twitter.com/FrenteQueretano

    Today, 25 March 2019, with 10 votes in favor and 3 against, as a united commission, the point of agreement is approved to allow marriage equality in Naucalpan!!! Naucalpan will become the first municipality in the State of México not to request amparos in order to celebrate same-sex marriages.

  • 37. VIRick  |  March 25, 2019 at 7:17 pm

    Chihuahua and Sinaloa: New Morena Marriage Equality Proposals to Be Presented

    Per Gonzalo Kinich:

    Las bancadas de Morena en Chihuahua y Sinaloa van a subir iniciativas de matrimonio igualitario en sus Congresos locales mañana, el 26 de marzo 2019, y pasado mañana, el 27 de marzo 2019, respetivamente.
    https://twitter.com/Kiwi_lloron

    The Morena caucus in Chihuahua and Sinaloa will submit marriage equality initiatives in their state Congresses tomorrow, 26 March 2019, and the day after tomorrow, 27 March 2019, respectively.

  • 38. allan120102  |  March 26, 2019 at 5:20 pm

    Looks like from all the cases in Ecuador this will be the one to bring marriage equality to the country. In this link it states all the cases pending that were taken hostage by the previous homophobic court. https://www.elcomercio.com/actualidad/pareja-matr

  • 39. VIRick  |  March 26, 2019 at 6:54 pm

    Allan, this is an excellent find, as that article clarifies everything, most importantly, properly identifying the actual case presently under consideration before the Constitutional Court of Ecuador, namely Case 0011-18-CN, one which we had not previously been following. Here it is:

    Ecuador: A Same-Sex Couple Will Be Heard by the Constitutional Court, Requesting Equal Civil Marriage

    Ecuador: Una Pareja del Mismo Sexo Será Escuchada por la Corte Constitucional, Pide Matrimonio Civil Igualitario

    El próximo viernes, 29 de marzo del 2019, en la Corte Constitucional, se realizará la audiencia de sustanciación del pedido de consulta por el caso de Efraín Soria y Javier Benalcázar, enviado por la Corte Provincial de Pichincha. Ambos son una pareja del mismo sexo que lleva 12 años de unión.

    ¿Qué buscan? Quieren casarse. Fueron al Registro Civil (de Quito) el 7 de mayo del 2018, y la entidad no aceptó su pedido. Entonces demandaron ante un juez de primera instancia y perdieron el caso. La sentencia de primera instancia se dio el 14 de agosto del año pasado, confirmó el abogado Christian Paula, de Pakta. Luego apelaron a la Corte Provincial de Justicia de Pichincha, que envió la pregunta a la Corte Constitucional.

    El 21 de este mes, a la pareja y a sus abogados se les notificó que el juez sustanciador, Ramiro Ávila Santamaria, estará a cargo de procesar su consulta. También se notificó a los jueces del Tribunal de la Sala Penal de la Corte Provincial de Justicia de Pichincha. Esta última realizó una consulta constitucional de aplicabilidad de la Opinión Consultiva 24 (OC-24/17 de la CIDH). Soria indicó que al tratarse de una consulta, la Corte Constitucional tenía 45 días para resolver su caso. En el país, hay más de ocho causas judiciales abiertas sobre matrimonio civil igualitario en Quito, Guayaquil, y Cuenca.
    https://www.elcomercio.com/actualidad/pareja-matr

    Ecuador: A Same-Sex Couple Will Be Heard by the Constitutional Court, Requesting Equal Civil Marriage

    This Friday, 29 March 2019, in the Constitutional Court, a hearing will be held to substantiate the request for consultation in the case of Efraín Soria and Javier Benalcázar, sent by the Provincial Court of Pichincha. They are a same-sex couple who have been together for 12 years.

    What are they looking for? They want to get married. They went to the Civil Registry (in Quito) on 7 May 2018, and that body did not accept their request. They then sued before a judge of first instance and lost the case. The judgment of first instance was given on 14 August 2018, confirmed their lawyer, Christian Paula, of Pakta. They then appealed to the Provincial Court of Justice of Pichincha, which then sent the question on to the Constitutional Court.

    On 21 March 2019, the couple and their lawyers were notified by the constitutional judge, Ramiro Ávila Santamaria, who will be in charge of processing their query (consulta). The judges of the Court of the Criminal Chamber of the Provincial Court of Justice of Pichincha were also notified. The latter carried out a constitutional consultation on the applicability of Advisory Opinion 24 (OC-24/17 of the CIDH). Soria indicated that when dealing with a query (consulta), the Constitutional Court would have 45 days to resolve its case. In Ecuador, there are more than eight open judicial cases on equal civil marriage from Quito, Guayaquil, and Cuenca.
    (to continue)

  • 40. VIRick  |  March 26, 2019 at 7:16 pm

    (continued)
    Ecuador: More Concerning Pamela Troya's Pending Marriage Equality Case before the Constitutional Court

    Mientras que otro es el proceso a seguir con el pedido de Pamela Troya y su pareja Gabriela Correa. Ellas, desde junio del 2014, esperan un pronunciamiento de la Corte Constitucional sobre su acción extraordinaria de protección para lograr el matrimonio civil igualitario.

    El grupo de abogados de Pakta recuerda que Pamela Troya y Gabriela Correa iniciaron la lucha por el Matrimonio Civil Igualitario en Ecuador en el 13 de agosto 2013. El juicio empezó y se perdió en las dos primeras instancias, motivo por el cual se interpuso una acción extraordinaria de protección ante la Corte Constitucional, misma que fue aceptada a trámite en 2014 con el número caso 1035-2014-EP. Lamentablemente, la anterior Corte mantuvo detenido el proceso cinco años, y hasta la actualidad, no se ha notificado su estado procesal.
    https://www.elcomercio.com/actualidad/pareja-matr

    Meanwhile, another to follow is the process with the request of Pamela Troya and her partner Gabriela Correa. Since June 2014, they have been awaiting a ruling from the Constitutional Court on their extraordinary protection action to achieve equal civil marriage.

    The group of lawyers for Pakta remembers that Pamela Troya and Gabriela Correa began the fight for the Equal Civil Marriage in Ecuador on 13 August 2013. The trial began and was lost in the first two instances, which is why an extraordinary protective action was filed before the Constitutional Court, one which was accepted for processing in 2014 with case number 1035-2014-EP. Unfortunately, the previous Court managed to detain the process for five years, and to date, have not notified them of its procedural status.

    Note: The second marriage equality case in Ecuador was filed in Guayaquil in late August 2013, several weeks after that of Pamela Troya and Gabriella Correa in Quito. Santiago Vinces and Fernando Saltos are the plaintiffs in this second suit, from Guayaquil, a case about which we have heard almost nothing ever since it was first filed there. On the other hand, the two marriage equality cases from Cuenca date from 2018, and have been much in the news, mainly because the court of first instance in Cuenca ruled in the same-sex couples' favor in both instances, the first time that that occurred anywhere in Ecuador. That court did so based on the OC-24/17 of the CIDH. Based on information from this article, in addition, there are at least three other marriage equality cases pending somewhere in Ecuador and about which we still know nothing.

  • 41. allan120102  |  March 29, 2019 at 10:31 am

    Breaking cayman islands legalize ssm by judge ruling. https://www.caymancompass.com/2019/03/29/chief-ju

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!