This coming weekend will mark a historic anniversary for LGBT Americans. It will have been 40 years since an early summer evening in New York City’s Greenwich Village saw the birth of the modern gay rights movement. June 28, 1969 was the day when LGBT people fought back against government and police persecution in the form of raids and arrests at bars where people could socialize and meet others like themselves. The Stonewall Inn was the location where LGBT people refused to go quietly, humiliated, into the night.

In standing up for their rights, that small group of people laid the groundwork, at a time when being gay was still considered a mental disorder no less, for what would become a full-scale movement for equality for LGBT Americans. When you think about it, the progress that we have achieved in such a short amount of time is simply amazing, even with occasional setbacks and loses that are an inevitable aspect of any effort to expand civil rights.

Today, after years of little more than faint hope, Congress stands on the cusp of passing critical and long overdue employment protections for LGBT people. Representative Barney Frank (D-MA), one of just a handful of openly gay and lesbian Members of Congress, has just introduced the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009 (H.R. 3017). This legislation, commonly referred to as ENDA, would prohibit discrimination in employment based on an individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. It already has a bipartisan group of 117 co-sponsors, including the Chairmen of the powerful House Judiciary and Education and Labor Committees.

As a sign of the progress that the LGBT community has achieved over the past 40 years, nearly 90% of Fortune 500 companies have implemented non-discrimination policies that include sexual orientation. Additionally, 20 states and the District of Columbia have passed laws prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Twelve states include those protections for people who are transgender.

While these facts are certainly encouraging, there is an obvious gap in our civil rights laws that leave many LGBT people vulnerable to employment discrimination based purely on who they are. In 2007, the ACLU released a report entitled Working in the Shadows: Ending Employment Discrimination for LGBT Americans, which highlighted the stories of those who have been discriminated against in their jobs because they happen to be gay or transgender. Anyone who thinks this isn’t a serious problem or that Congress does not need to act should read the stories highlighted in this report.

This April, the ACLU won an important legal victory for a transgender veteran who was denied a job with the Library of Congress after she informed them of her intention to transition from male to female. And just yesterday, there was a story in The New York Timesabout how lawyers in the Obama administration are finalizing first-of-their-kind guidelines that will bar workplace discrimination against transgender federal employees.

Passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) will help to ensure that LGBT Americans will no longer need to live in fear at their jobs that they may be “outted” and lose their only means of survival or won’t even be given a chance because they are transgender. These are such basic protections that most people take them for granted. ACLU members and activists should contact their Members of Congress and urge them to finally pass this legislation.

As those of us who happen to be part of the LGBT community remember the historic 40th anniversary of Stonewall, I can think of no better way for Congress to show its commitment to equality and fairness for all Americans than by passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009.

Yesterday, Attorney General Holder appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a semiannual check-up (a.k.a. congressional oversight). Attorney General Holder was questioned about a many issues of interest to the ACLU. However, there was one question and answer that left me feeling cautiously hopeful.

In response to a fairly lengthy question from Senator Durbin (D-Ill.), Attorney General Holder said it was his hope that Congress would move with "dispatch" to eliminate the notorious and racially discriminatory crack sentencing disparity this year.

The Obama Department of Justice has previously testified in support of eliminating the crack sentencing disparity, but hopefully the comments of Attorney General Holder today will finally light the necessary fire under the tail feathers of certain Members of Congress. Early indications are promising. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy (D-Vt.) immediately responded by saying that it was his hope to see Congress act this year to end the more than two-decade "crack" in our justice system.

Additionally, it is very likely that we will soon see Congress begin the process of moving legislation that would finally correct this injustice. ACLU members and activists should act now to contact their representatives to let them know that this is an issue that demands their attention. Two decades are too long to wait. Our prisons are too crowded. We are spending too much money on an effective, unfair policy. It is time for Congress to move with the necessary "dispatch" to right this wrong!

What a week it’s been! On Monday and Tuesday, dozens of dedicated advocates from across the country were here in Washington to meet with Members of Congress about the pressing need to finally (after nearly 23 years) eliminate the infamous 100-to-1 crack sentencing disparity.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Justice, for the first time, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and stated that it is the administration’s position that Congress should act this year to completely eliminate the disparity.

And now today, both The New York Times and The Boston Globe have great editorials highlighting the testimony from this week’s congressional hearing and urge Congress to step-up to the plate to finally end this glaring injustice in our criminal justice system.

This is about making sure those moving words carved over the entrance to the Supreme Court - Equal Justice Under Law - are good for more than tourist pictures on a summer afternoon.

As The Globe observed today:

In poignant testimony following Breuer’s, Judge Reggie Walton, an African-American who was appointed to the federal judiciary by Ronald Reagan and rose up the ranks under George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, declared that “jails are loaded with people who look like me.” The law created such mistrust that jurors often told him after trials that they could not convict, even if a defendant seemed guilty, because the mandatory sentence was so Draconian.

They end their editorial by stating:

What’s sad is that this did not happen until America had a president who can look into the jails and feel the sting of seeing how loaded they are with people who look just like him.

It is certainly sad that it has taken over two decades to get to this point. However, now that it has arrived, we need to seize the moment and the momentum by FINALLY ending this injustice. Let’s keep the pressure on!

Well, what an afternoon of debate it was on the House floor yesterday. After sitting through literally hours of debate during the House Judiciary Committee consideration of the legislation last week, I thought I had heard it all. Little did I know that I would have the good fortune to see a certain Republican representative get on the floor and actually have a fairly lengthy rant about…wait for it…wait for it…celebratory gossip blogger Perez Hilton and a certain beauty queen from the Golden State. Really? This is seriously the best you can come up with?

Anyway, after wading through such foolishness and a very witty, funny closing argument by gay Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank, the House did indeed pass the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. The final tally had a whopping 249 representatives voting “Yes”!

What’s even more impressive, the legislation advances civil rights, while upholding critical free speech and association protections. And that is something that the truest of the true civil libertarians could happily look upon. Protecting civil rights and the First Amendment need not be a zero-sum game; in fact, the two really are complements of one another.

This is a view that the ACLU shares with some friends in high places. Just yesterday, President Obama stated:

I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance — legislation that will enhance civil rights protections, while also protecting our freedom of speech and association.

The battle now moves over to the Senate. If they are smart, they’ll recognize that we can protect both civil rights and the free speech.

What a momentous day it was here in Washington!

Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs held a hearing on the 100-to-1 crack vs. powder cocaine sentencing disparity. There were many excellent witnesses who powerfully presented the case for reform, including the former head of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Asa Hutchinson.

Without question, the highlight of the morning’s hearing was the testimony of Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer (PDF). Assistant Attorney General Breuer, in very direct language, laid out the administration’s position on this issue. In short, the Obama administration wants Congress to act this year to completely eliminate the crack sentencing disparity.

This is indeed excellent news and to have the backing of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. is going to go a long way towards helping us finally end this injustice. However, it won’t happen without the support and dedication of people throughout the country. We are heading into the bottom of the 9th, let’s not stop now. Join the ACLU in calling for Congress to end this unjust sentencing disparity.

So it took two days, but all in all, a very nice result. After fending off all of the poison-pill amendments, the House Judiciary Committee passed H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 earlier today.

The next hurdle will be a debate and vote in the full House of Representatives, which could happen as early as next week. From there, we’re on to the fun-filled U.S. Senate. Fingers crossed, we’ll be in the White House Rose Garden before the heat and humidity of a DC summer even set in. This stuff doesn’t happen in a vacuum though, so I hope all my fellow ACLUers will let their representatives and senators know that protecting civil rights and our 1^st Amendment liberties are absolutely not a zero-sum game.

As the ACLU’s Legislative Director, Caroline Fredrickson said –

The ACLU strongly supports the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act as protecting both civil rights and free speech and association. We have found in our experience of fighting for stronger protections for civil rights and free speech and association rights that the two go hand in hand. Vigilant protection of free speech rights historically has opened the doors to effective advocacy for expanded civil rights protections.

Additionally, last week, I wrote about the tragic murder of Angie Zapata as showing, in a very real way, why it is so important to cover gender identity in the hate crimes legislation (it thankfully does). Just yesterday, the man who brutally murdered 18-year-old Angie was convicted of her death and sentenced to life in prison.

As this debate moves forward, I hope that Members of Congress keep people like Angie in their minds. I was delighted to hear Attorney General Eric Holder state just today how important his Justice Department considers hate crimes and express his support for expanding the federal government’s ability to address them.

Stay tuned as the debate now moves to the Gang of 435.

After a good five hours of debate and nearly a dozen poison-pill amendments, the House Judiciary Committee has recessed until 10am tomorrow morning, at which time they will resume debate on H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. The bill provides important new federal authority for investigating and prosecuting criminal civil rights violations, while also including strong protections for speech and association.

Despite the crocodile tears from opponents of the legislation, this isn’t about “thoughts” or “beliefs,” but rather violent acts of hatred. All anyone needs to do is actually read the legislation to find the speech and association protections, which would be the strongest against the misuse of a person’s free speech that Congress has enacted as part of the federal criminal code.

A little silver lining from today’s debate? The amendments, which are nothing more than attempts to undermine the entire bill, are being rejected, including one to strip gender identity protections. Representative Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) gave an excellent defense for keeping those protections in place. Go Tammy!

Roll-your-eyes moment of the day? There have been many, but a personal favorite had to be Representative Steve King’s (R-Iowa) amendment to change the title of the bill to the “Thought Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.”

More tomorrow…

Some of you may be familiar with the brutal murder of 18-year-old Angie Zapata. Angie was killed in Greeley, Colorado, after a man she had met on the Internet and gone on a date with discovered that she was biologically male.

The man currently on trial for killing Angie is the first case in which a state’s hate crimes law has been used to prosecute the killing of a transgender person. According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, 11 states, as well as the District of Columbia, currently have hate crimes laws which are inclusive of gender identity. That leaves a pretty wide and expansive area of the country where no such protection exists, despite the fact that transgender people face well-documented and dangerous levels of bias-motivated violence and discrimination.

Congress will soon have the opportunity to pass a strong federal hate crimes law that protects both civil rights and free speech and association. H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, makes several important changes in federal civil rights law. It would provide new federal authority for investigating and prosecuting criminal civil rights violations, while also including strong protections for speech and association. Specifically, the bill would remove existing jurisdictional obstacles to the federal government prosecuting certain violent acts based on race, color, national origin, and religion, and also create new authority for the federal government to prosecute certain violent acts based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability.

As important as this new authority is for protecting civil rights, the ACLU’s support for this bill has been contingent on a specific provision that prohibits the use of evidence of a defendant’s speech or association unless specifically related to the crime. This provision would be the strongest protection for free speech in the entire federal criminal code.

This is a very worthy and important piece of legislation. While necessitated by horrible events like the murder of Angie Zapata, having the federal government add gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability to the existing hate crimes statute would send a very powerful message that such crimes of violent hatred have no place in our country.

Today, March 21, is the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Too often these types of dates and anniversaries pass by without anyone taking much note. However, this day, which was originally established by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966, provides a perfect opportunity to examine our own country’s criminal justice system, which remains tragically rife with racial and ethnic disparities.

One of the single most outrageous disparities in our criminal justice system today remains the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity ratio between crack cocaine and powder cocaine, which has existed in federal law for more than two decades. It takes 100 times more powder cocaine than crack to trigger the same irrationally harsh five and 10-year mandatory minimum prison sentences. For example, possessing as little as five grams of crack cocaine, little more than a sugar packet’s worth, will result in the same five-year prison sentence as dealing 500 grams of the powder form of the drug. (By the way, it should be noted that crack and powder represent just different forms of the same drug, cocaine.)

The 100-to-1 disparity has been a driving force behind the gross racial inequality that has come to plague both drug law enforcement and the criminal justice system in general. Additionally, it has turned the concept of a system of justice where all individuals are treated equally on its head.

In December of 2007, the ACLU released a comprehensive analysis of the pervasive, institutionalized, systemic and structural racism that continues to plague our society. This report, Race and Ethnicity in America: Turning a Blind Eye to Injustice, was written as a response to a report released by the U.S. government (still operating under the dark period now simply known as the "Bush Years") earlier in the year to United Nations’ Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). The U.S. report was sadly little more than a "whitewash" attempt to sweep the dramatic effects of widespread racial and ethnic discrimination in this country under the rug.

Read more…

What a powerful morning it was to be on Capitol Hill last Thursday! Father Greg Boyle, a.k.a. "G," the founder and Executive Director of Los Angeles-based Homeboy Industries, was here in Washington, D.C., to speak with Members of Congress about what approaches really work in reaching gang-involved and at-risk youth. He spoke at a crowded briefing on the most innovative and successful strategies around gangs and violence prevention.

I was most struck by the level of humanity and compassion Father Greg brought to this issue. In speaking of the standard "get tough" approaches, Father Greg said that far too often the public debate around gangs is merely a matter of going in the wrong direction quickly or in the slow lane. In the end, you still end up in the same bad place of more young people being locked up in prison and away from the promise of a fulfilling life. What he, and congressional leaders like Representative Bobby Scott (D-Va.), propose instead is reevaluating what has been done in the past and pursuing new, more hopeful approaches.

Originally started as a small, local effort by a committed and caring man in 1988, Homeboy Industries has grown to become the largest gang intervention program in the country and a national model. Today, Father Greg employs hundreds of young men and women seeking to leave gang life behind them. In addition to providing job training, placement assistance and other free programs, Homeboy Industries operates a number of small businesses, where the most difficult-to-place individuals are hired in transitional jobs, thus giving them a safe and supportive environment in which to develop their job skills. Perhaps one of the most important things that Homeboy Industries does is bring former gang rivals together to work in a spirit of cooperation and friendship. The transformational impact of such approaches on the lives of young people and the communities in which they live is immeasurable.

If anyone needs reminding of why the efforts of individuals like Father Greg are so important, I recommend reading my Capital Punishment Project colleague Brian Stull’s moving blog post, "Executing Failure." Brian writes about the gross failure it represents on the part of government to invest extraordinary resources into obtaining and carrying out death sentences, while doing next to nothing to help individuals turn their lives around before becoming occupants of death row. We need to move beyond the notion that there is such a thing as "throwaway people."

There is legislation at the national level that seeks to work with at-risk young people and engages their communities as an active part of the solution — the Youth PROMISE Act. Passage of the Youth PROMISE Act would help to empower many more Father G’s around the country who work tirelessly each and every day with vulnerable young people and the communities in which they live. Fortunately, just last month, the Los Angeles City Council unanimously approved a resolution in support of the Youth PROMISE Act. The momentum is on our side!