Democrats In Congress To Introduce New Comprehensive LGBT Rights Bill – 7 Ways It Could Help You
Democrats are introducing a comprehensive LGBT rights bill in Congress this week. Here are 7 ways it could positively impact you.
We’ve seen monumental progress in the fight for LGBT equality over the past few weeks. The Supreme Court of the United States gave us marriage equality on June 26, and last Thursday the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ruled that GLB workers are protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, just as it did for transgender workers last year.
UPDATE: July 23 12:40 PM EDT –
Watch Live NOW: Democrats Introduce Historic, Expansive LGBT Civil Rights Bill
Hoping to use this momentum and take LGBT equality another giant step forward, Democrats in Congress plan to introduce broad legislation this week to protect LGBT people from discrimination.
On Monday, in a “dear colleagues†letter, Rhode Island Democratic Rep. David Cicilline requested co-sponsors for his Equality Act bill that would protect LGBT people from discrimination in areas such as housing, workplaces, schools, and public accommodations. BuzzFeed reports that Rep. Cicilline plans to introduce the measure at the same time Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon files a companion bill in the Senate.
Here are seven reasons why this bill is important to you:
1.) CREDIT: Currently, creditworthy people can be refused loans, leases, and/or credit cards if a lender wants to discriminate against the applicant’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), passed in 1974, prohibits credit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age or because a person receives public assistance. It does not, however, explicitly ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The proposed Equality Act would rectify this.
2.) EDUCATION: Currently, federal law prohibits discrimination in education on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, and disability; however there are no explicit federal protections for students based on sexual orientation or gender identity. According to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), 35 states offer little or no explicit protections for LGBT students, but this discrimination affects more than just students. It impacts every taxpaying American citizen. How, you might ask? Well, the Column reports that eight colleges and universities in Minnesota alone took in more than $15 million in federal taxpayer money in 2014 while barring openly LGBT students from attending or prohibiting LGBT people in employment. The new bill would stop schools that discriminate against the LGBT community from receiving million-dollar tax credits from the federal government.
3.) EMPLOYMENT: “In most states, a same-sex couple can get married on Saturday, post pictures on Facebook on Sunday, and then risk being fired from their job or kicked out of their apartment on Monday,†Cicilline said in his “dear colleagues†letter. In fact, there are 29 states that don’t have laws explicitly prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, and 32 states don’t have laws explicitly prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity. As a result, LGBT people can be harassed, denied a promotion, and even fired for something that is not even related to their work performance. This bill would ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
4.) HOUSING: The Fair Housing Act (FHA) currently prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, and disability in the sale or rental of housing. This applies to both public and private housing including single-family homes, apartments, condominiums, mobile homes, etc. The HRC reports that in 2011, heterosexual couples were favored over gay male or lesbian couples by 15.9 and 15.6 percent, respectively. The National Center for Transgender Equality reports that one in five transgender people have been refused a home or apartment because of their gender identity or expression. This new bill would ban discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
5.) JURY SERVICE: It’s hard to imagine how an LGBT person could have a fair trial when the jury selection process allows for discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. That’s one of the reasons this bill is so important. There are currently no explicit federal protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity for jury discrimination. In 2012, a lawyer used his first peremptory challenge to strike a prospective juror in an HIV related case because the prospective juror was a gay man. The Ninth Circuit Court ruled that the removal of a juror due to sexual orientation was prohibited by the 14th Amendment, but the Supreme Court of the United States has not yet addressed this issue.
6.) FEDERAL FUNDING: The majority of federal programs do not have explicit prohibition against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Examples of a few of the federally funded programs that would be impacted include, but are not limited to job training programs run by welfare benefit providers, hospitals receiving Medicare and Medicaid, foster care and adoption agencies, police and justice programs, and more. Â
7.) PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION: You’ve heard about this one a gazillion times by now. Whether it’s a baker that doesn’t want to provide a wedding cake to a same-sex couple, or a florist that doesn’t want to make the couple’s bouquet, companies are using religion as an excuse to refuse service to LGBT people. The HRC reports that 23 percent of LGBT people had received poor service in a restaurant, hotel or place of business because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, and 53 percent of transgender people reported experiencing verbal harassment and bullying in public spaces. It’s time to remove this legal discrimination once and for all.
The Equality Act could significantly impact the lives of many LGBT Americans. Ironically, its introduction coincides with a committee vote on a Republican-backed bill to “protect” people and organizations that disagree with same-sex marriage.
Will it be possible to pass the Equality Act in a Republican dominated House and Senate? Get your dialing finger ready. It’s going to be time to call your representatives soon.Â
Â
Image by JBrazito via Flickr and a CC license
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
|
Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.
Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”
“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”
In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”
He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”
“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”
“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”
“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.
“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”
Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”
Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.
Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) July 6, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.
“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”
The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”
Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”
TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”
Critics blasted Trump.
“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.
One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”
Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”
The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.
According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.
Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”
“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”
Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”
Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.
Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.
The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.
“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.
The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.
“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”
Image via Reuters
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
