Last Seen Blogs
metaphysical-puddle
Lucid Dreaming
aireyverkhovensky
Punished Novel "Venom" Makeouts
dedenneblogs
mouseman_47 / Dedenne
naksedapje
Untitled
Link
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan : Request for a 42-Month Arrangement Under the Extended Credit Facility-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
Published November 13, 2020 at 08:00AM
Read more at imf.org
0 notes
Link
How COVID-19 is Setting Working Women Back
In early October, the United States Labor Department reported that women were leaving the workforce at four times the rate of men. A few months earlier, a report from McKinsey Global revealed that while women made up 43 percent of the workforce, they had borne 56 percent of COVID-related job losses. This data — and much more — led one news source to call this moment “America’s First Female Recession.”
This week, Colleen Ammerman joined At Liberty to discuss why this is happening, and what we can do about it. Ammerman is the director of Harvard Business School’s Gender Initiative. She is also the co-author of an upcoming book Glass Half Broken: Shattering the Barriers That Still Hold Women Back at Work.
While disparities in pay and access to power in the workplace are not new, Ammerman says the divides are now starker than ever because of COVID-19: “What we’re seeing the pandemic do is really just both reveal and entrench some of these inequalities, both along racial and gender lines.”
https://soundcloud.com/aclu/how-covid-19-is-setting-working-women-back/s-A0Xsu36Shi9
Published November 14, 2020 at 04:05AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3nfq1KO
0 notes
Link
How COVID-19 is Setting Working Women Back
In early October, the United States Labor Department reported that women were leaving the workforce at four times the rate of men. A few months earlier, a report from McKinsey Global revealed that while women made up 43 percent of the workforce, they had borne 56 percent of COVID-related job losses. This data — and much more — led one news source to call this moment “America’s First Female Recession.”
This week, Colleen Ammerman joined At Liberty to discuss why this is happening, and what we can do about it. Ammerman is the director of Harvard Business School’s Gender Initiative. She is also the co-author of an upcoming book Glass Half Broken: Shattering the Barriers That Still Hold Women Back at Work.
While disparities in pay and access to power in the workplace are not new, Ammerman says the divides are now starker than ever because of COVID-19: “What we’re seeing the pandemic do is really just both reveal and entrench some of these inequalities, both along racial and gender lines.”
https://soundcloud.com/aclu/how-covid-19-is-setting-working-women-back/s-A0Xsu36Shi9
Published November 13, 2020 at 10:35PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3nfq1KO
0 notes
Link
Norway : Financial Sector Assessment Program-Technical Note-Risk Analysis and Stress Testing
Published November 10, 2020 at 08:00AM
Read more at imf.org
0 notes
Link
Spain : Selected Issues
Published November 13, 2020 at 08:00AM
Read more at imf.org
0 notes
Link
Spain : 2020 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for Spain
Published November 13, 2020 at 08:00AM
Read more at imf.org
0 notes
Link
President-Elect Biden’s Reproductive Freedom To-Do List
After four years of attacks on our reproductive rights and health by the Trump administration and the anti-abortion legislators it has emboldened around the country, there is much to repair. When President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris take office, their administration must make it a top priority to not just undo the damage, but to take bold, visionary steps to make reproductive health care — including abortion — accessible to all, regardless of their income or ZIP code. Congress, too, has a key role to play in ensuring that everyone is afforded the dignity to make our own decisions about our lives.
Here are just a few of the many items that should top our elected officials’ to-do list:
Reverse dangerous Trump administration regulations targeting reproductive health care, including:
The refusal of care rule, which aimed to dramatically expand health care institutions’ and workers’ ability to withhold and obstruct access to essential, even life-saving medical care and information — with no regard for patients’ well-being.While it was rightly struck down in court, it is one of many attempts by the Trump administration to invoke religious or personal beliefs to justify discrimination, particularly against LGBTQ people and people seeking reproductive health care. The Biden administration must ensure that religious liberty is never used as a license to discriminate, and that patients’ needs always come first in health care.
The rule undermining the ACA’s birth control benefit, which allows employers and universities to deny their employees or students insurance coverage for contraception by invoking religious or moral objections. This is yet another example of how the Trump administration has discriminated against those seeking health care under the guise of protecting religious liberty. In July, the Supreme Court allowed this discriminatory rule to take effect, potentially robbing hundreds of thousands of people of their no-cost birth control coverage, and forcing employees and students to instead pay out of pocket. The Biden administration must guarantee that no one is denied birth control coverage because of where they work or where they go to school.
The rule that has devastated Title X, the 50-year-old family planning program that has provided 4 million patients with low or no incomes with affordable birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and other critical preventive care. The rule prohibits family planning clinics that participate in the program from referring patients for abortion care and imposes other onerous and dangerous requirements. It has resulted in the widespread loss of Title X providers and reduced access to family planning services for those who rely on the program. The Biden administration must restore and rebuild the critical Title X program.
Ensure safe access to medication abortion during the pandemic and beyond.
During the pandemic, the Trump administration went all the way to the Supreme Court to make it as difficult as possible for people to safely access medication abortion care — specifically mifepristone, a prescription medication that has been used to safely end early pregnancies and treat early miscarriages for 20 years. The administration has refused to allow patients to obtain their prescription by mail, insisting that patients travel to a health center solely to pick up a pill, subjecting patients to needless COVID-19 risks. This is despite the Food and Drug Administration having suspended similar requirements for other, far less safe medications during the pandemic. The ACLU won in court, blocking the in-person requirement during the pandemic, but the Supreme Court will soon consider the Trump administration’s request to reinstate it.
This in-person dispensing requirement is part of a longstanding package of outdated, medically unnecessary FDA restrictions that, even prior to COVID-19, have obstructed access to medication abortion — particularly for people with low incomes and communities of color. The Biden administration must immediately pause enforcement of the mifepristone in-person dispensing requirement during the public health emergency. And the FDA should undertake a comprehensive review of the full set of restrictions on mifepristone to ensure that, beyond the pandemic, patients’ access to this safe, effective medication is based on the latest science and medical evidence.
Make the Hyde Amendment history once and for all.
President-elect Biden has pledged his support for ending the Hyde Amendment, a harmful ban on abortion coverage for people enrolled in Medicaid and other insurance programs. For decades, Hyde and related bans have pushed abortion care out of reach for people struggling to make ends meet, particularly women of color — the same communities that face severe health care disparities as a result of structural inequality and are now being hit hardest by the pandemic and economic crisis.
Now it’s time for Biden to take the critical first step toward ending these discriminatory coverage bans by striking Hyde and all related abortion coverage restrictions from his first budget. This, along with calling on Congress to pass the EACH Woman Act to lift coverage bans, will send a clear message that this administration will work to make abortion not only legal, but also accessible to all.
Enact a nationwide safeguard against state restrictions.
States have passed more than 460 politically motivated laws to push abortion care out of reach over the last decade çefforts buoyed recently by Trump’s appointment of multiple Supreme Court justices. These laws range from bans on abortion from the earliest days of pregnancy, to laws that interfere with the provider-patient relationship like forced ultrasounds and mandatory delay periods, to clinic shutdown laws that force patients to travel long distances (paying for transportation, lodging, and child care in the process) to obtain care. These restrictions have so severely eroded access to care across vast regions of the country, leaving the right to abortion effectively hollow for many people.
President-elect Biden should also call for swift passage of the Women’s Health Protection Act to address the crisis of state attacks on abortion access. WHPA would put a stop to these state attacks and, paired with EACH, would make care more affordable and accessible for people throughout the country.
****
As we look back at the last four years and toward a new administration, there’s no question that there’s a lot of work to do — but we’re ready to go. And our elected officials should be too.
Published November 12, 2020 at 11:59PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/2UlokPt
0 notes
Link
President-Elect Biden’s Reproductive Freedom To-Do List
After four years of attacks on our reproductive rights and health by the Trump administration and the anti-abortion legislators it has emboldened around the country, there is much to repair. When President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris take office, their administration must make it a top priority to not just undo the damage, but to take bold, visionary steps to make reproductive health care — including abortion — accessible to all, regardless of their income or ZIP code. Congress, too, has a key role to play in ensuring that everyone is afforded the dignity to make our own decisions about our lives.
Here are just a few of the many items that should top our elected officials’ to-do list:
Reverse dangerous Trump administration regulations targeting reproductive health care, including:
The refusal of care rule, which aimed to dramatically expand health care institutions’ and workers’ ability to withhold and obstruct access to essential, even life-saving medical care and information — with no regard for patients’ well-being.While it was rightly struck down in court, it is one of many attempts by the Trump administration to invoke religious or personal beliefs to justify discrimination, particularly against LGBTQ people and people seeking reproductive health care. The Biden administration must ensure that religious liberty is never used as a license to discriminate, and that patients’ needs always come first in health care.
The rule undermining the ACA’s birth control benefit, which allows employers and universities to deny their employees or students insurance coverage for contraception by invoking religious or moral objections. This is yet another example of how the Trump administration has discriminated against those seeking health care under the guise of protecting religious liberty. In July, the Supreme Court allowed this discriminatory rule to take effect, potentially robbing hundreds of thousands of people of their no-cost birth control coverage, and forcing employees and students to instead pay out of pocket. The Biden administration must guarantee that no one is denied birth control coverage because of where they work or where they go to school.
The rule that has devastated Title X, the 50-year-old family planning program that has provided 4 million patients with low or no incomes with affordable birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and other critical preventive care. The rule prohibits family planning clinics that participate in the program from referring patients for abortion care and imposes other onerous and dangerous requirements. It has resulted in the widespread loss of Title X providers and reduced access to family planning services for those who rely on the program. The Biden administration must restore and rebuild the critical Title X program.
Ensure safe access to medication abortion during the pandemic and beyond.
During the pandemic, the Trump administration went all the way to the Supreme Court to make it as difficult as possible for people to safely access medication abortion care — specifically mifepristone, a prescription medication that has been used to safely end early pregnancies and treat early miscarriages for 20 years. The administration has refused to allow patients to obtain their prescription by mail, insisting that patients travel to a health center solely to pick up a pill, subjecting patients to needless COVID-19 risks. This is despite the Food and Drug Administration having suspended similar requirements for other, far less safe medications during the pandemic. The ACLU won in court, blocking the in-person requirement during the pandemic, but the Supreme Court will soon consider the Trump administration’s request to reinstate it.
This in-person dispensing requirement is part of a longstanding package of outdated, medically unnecessary FDA restrictions that, even prior to COVID-19, have obstructed access to medication abortion — particularly for people with low incomes and communities of color. The Biden administration must immediately pause enforcement of the mifepristone in-person dispensing requirement during the public health emergency. And the FDA should undertake a comprehensive review of the full set of restrictions on mifepristone to ensure that, beyond the pandemic, patients’ access to this safe, effective medication is based on the latest science and medical evidence.
Make the Hyde Amendment history once and for all.
President-elect Biden has pledged his support for ending the Hyde Amendment, a harmful ban on abortion coverage for people enrolled in Medicaid and other insurance programs. For decades, Hyde and related bans have pushed abortion care out of reach for people struggling to make ends meet, particularly women of color — the same communities that face severe health care disparities as a result of structural inequality and are now being hit hardest by the pandemic and economic crisis.
Now it’s time for Biden to take the critical first step toward ending these discriminatory coverage bans by striking Hyde and all related abortion coverage restrictions from his first budget. This, along with calling on Congress to pass the EACH Woman Act to lift coverage bans, will send a clear message that this administration will work to make abortion not only legal, but also accessible to all.
Enact a nationwide safeguard against state restrictions.
States have passed more than 460 politically motivated laws to push abortion care out of reach over the last decade çefforts buoyed recently by Trump’s appointment of multiple Supreme Court justices. These laws range from bans on abortion from the earliest days of pregnancy, to laws that interfere with the provider-patient relationship like forced ultrasounds and mandatory delay periods, to clinic shutdown laws that force patients to travel long distances (paying for transportation, lodging, and child care in the process) to obtain care. These restrictions have so severely eroded access to care across vast regions of the country, leaving the right to abortion effectively hollow for many people.
President-elect Biden should also call for swift passage of the Women’s Health Protection Act to address the crisis of state attacks on abortion access. WHPA would put a stop to these state attacks and, paired with EACH, would make care more affordable and accessible for people throughout the country.
****
As we look back at the last four years and toward a new administration, there’s no question that there’s a lot of work to do — but we’re ready to go. And our elected officials should be too.
Published November 12, 2020 at 06:29PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/2UlokPt
0 notes
Link
Men Are Being Fired for Being Caregivers. Here’s Why that Hurts Women Too.
One of the simplest joys of expecting a baby is sharing the news with other people. That wasn’t the case for Steven van Soeren, a product designer for Disney’s streaming service, when his wife became pregnant.
“You shouldn’t have a kid,” one Disney coworker told him, according to allegations in his complaint. “I don’t know why he decided to have a kid,” said another within earshot of van Soeren.
Objections to van Soeren becoming a father weren’t limited to cruel remarks. Shortly after van Soeren returned from two weeks of paternity leave, he was fired. Van Soeren thought that was wrong — and illegal. He sued his former employer, but a federal court dismissed van Soeren’s case last month, reasoning that his firing wasn’t unlawful discrimination because van Soeren himself had not been pregnant.
The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg would have disagreed. She was well known for her legal strategy arguing cases on behalf of men to demonstrate how sex discrimination harms us all. Ginsburg wanted everyone to have equal opportunity to work and participate in family life according to their own needs and wants, regardless of their gender. She also knew that in order for women to enjoy full equity outside the home, society would have to empower men to share the responsibilities within it. That meant breaking free from traditional gender roles and discriminatory laws that dictated that caregiving was a woman’s job — and never a man’s.
Ginsburg’s view of the law prevailed, in 1975 and beyond. In a 2003 decision authored by then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist (and joined by Ginsburg, by that point a member of the court herself), the Supreme Court noted that by denying men paternity leave or discouraging them from taking it, employers “created a self-fulfilling cycle of discrimination that forced women to continue to assume the role of primary family caregiver.” Congress, it held, was rightly empowered to address sex discrimination of this kind.
Yet the van Soeren decision demonstrates that existing federal law is insufficient. Local laws have filled the gap — New York City, for example, added express protections against discrimination for caregivers, regardless of gender or one’s ability to become pregnant, in 2016. In June, Sen. Cory Booker introduced legislation that would protect all mothers, fathers, and other family caregivers from employment discrimination.
That’s important because caregiving isn’t just about parenting. The New York City Commission on Human Rights, which enforces local laws against caregiving discrimination, regularly receives complaints from New Yorkers who say they’ve been penalized for caring for their spouses, parents, and other loved ones. One man reported losing his job after telling his supervisor that he needed to take a week off to care for his wife after an illness. He says his supervisor laughed at him for doing “the woman’s job” and then replaced him while he was out caring for his wife.
Another New Yorker said she asked to work remotely from her mother’s home in another state while her mother went through cancer treatment. She was surprised when the request was denied; she worked for an international company, where teams were spread across multiple offices and collaborate remotely, and other employees had been allowed to work remotely for personal travel or a spouse’s sabbatical. And though she wasn’t able to care for her mother, she was punished simply for making the request, coming under increased scrutiny and, ultimately, laid off while others without caregiving responsibilities were allowed to keep their jobs.
Fortunately, both workers were protected by New York City’s law. But without nationwide express protections from caregiver discrimination in all its forms, the van Soeren decision sends a terrible message — and one that could not land at a worse time.
Women are at the center of the most unequal recession in modern American history. The back-to-school season — without physical school reopenings in many parts of the country — has worsened the situation: Of 1.1 million workers who dropped out of the workforce in September, 80 percent were women. This shouldn’t be surprising. Parents, overwhelmingly mothers, have had no alternative but to drop out of the labor market to manage their children’s education. This decision is likely the result of women’s entrenched income inequality, leading many different-sex couples to try to preserve the earning potential of the partner who makes more. In most cases, that’s the man.
Other mothers have had the choice made for them, either because they work in jobs that can’t be done from home or because their employers penalized them for having children at home while they worked. Coupled with the already disproportionately high rates of unemployment for women since the start of the pandemic, it may take decades for women to recover. And these disparities are far worse for women working in low-wage positions, Black women, and other women of color.
All of this explains why Ginsburg might well have decided to take on a case like van Soeren’s. As Ginsburg famously said, “Women will only have true equality when men share with them the responsibility of bringing up the next generation.” Now more than ever, lawmakers across the country must work to make Ginsburg’s vision a reality by ensuring caregiving discrimination protections for all — regardless of gender.
Published November 12, 2020 at 04:00PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3eUGYHt
0 notes
Link
Men Are Being Fired for Being Caregivers. Here’s Why that Hurts Women Too.
One of the simplest joys of expecting a baby is sharing the news with other people. That wasn’t the case for Steven van Soeren, a product designer for Disney’s streaming service, when his wife became pregnant.
“You shouldn’t have a kid,” one Disney coworker told him, according to allegations in his complaint. “I don’t know why he decided to have a kid,” said another within earshot of van Soeren.
Objections to van Soeren becoming a father weren’t limited to cruel remarks. Shortly after van Soeren returned from two weeks of paternity leave, he was fired. Van Soeren thought that was wrong — and illegal. He sued his former employer, but a federal court dismissed van Soeren’s case last month, reasoning that his firing wasn’t unlawful discrimination because van Soeren himself had not been pregnant.
The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg would have disagreed. She was well known for her legal strategy arguing cases on behalf of men to demonstrate how sex discrimination harms us all. Ginsburg wanted everyone to have equal opportunity to work and participate in family life according to their own needs and wants, regardless of their gender. She also knew that in order for women to enjoy full equity outside the home, society would have to empower men to share the responsibilities within it. That meant breaking free from traditional gender roles and discriminatory laws that dictated that caregiving was a woman’s job — and never a man’s.
Ginsburg’s view of the law prevailed, in 1975 and beyond. In a 2003 decision authored by then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist (and joined by Ginsburg, by that point a member of the court herself), the Supreme Court noted that by denying men paternity leave or discouraging them from taking it, employers “created a self-fulfilling cycle of discrimination that forced women to continue to assume the role of primary family caregiver.” Congress, it held, was rightly empowered to address sex discrimination of this kind.
Yet the van Soeren decision demonstrates that existing federal law is insufficient. Local laws have filled the gap — New York City, for example, added express protections against discrimination for caregivers, regardless of gender or one’s ability to become pregnant, in 2016. In June, Sen. Cory Booker introduced legislation that would protect all mothers, fathers, and other family caregivers from employment discrimination.
That’s important because caregiving isn’t just about parenting. The New York City Commission on Human Rights, which enforces local laws against caregiving discrimination, regularly receives complaints from New Yorkers who say they’ve been penalized for caring for their spouses, parents, and other loved ones. One man reported losing his job after telling his supervisor that he needed to take a week off to care for his wife after an illness. He says his supervisor laughed at him for doing “the woman’s job” and then replaced him while he was out caring for his wife.
Another New Yorker said she asked to work remotely from her mother’s home in another state while her mother went through cancer treatment. She was surprised when the request was denied; she worked for an international company, where teams were spread across multiple offices and collaborate remotely, and other employees had been allowed to work remotely for personal travel or a spouse’s sabbatical. And though she wasn’t able to care for her mother, she was punished simply for making the request, coming under increased scrutiny and, ultimately, laid off while others without caregiving responsibilities were allowed to keep their jobs.
Fortunately, both workers were protected by New York City’s law. But without nationwide express protections from caregiver discrimination in all its forms, the van Soeren decision sends a terrible message — and one that could not land at a worse time.
Women are at the center of the most unequal recession in modern American history. The back-to-school season — without physical school reopenings in many parts of the country — has worsened the situation: Of 1.1 million workers who dropped out of the workforce in September, 80 percent were women. This shouldn’t be surprising. Parents, overwhelmingly mothers, have had no alternative but to drop out of the labor market to manage their children’s education. This decision is likely the result of women’s entrenched income inequality, leading many different-sex couples to try to preserve the earning potential of the partner who makes more. In most cases, that’s the man.
Other mothers have had the choice made for them, either because they work in jobs that can’t be done from home or because their employers penalized them for having children at home while they worked. Coupled with the already disproportionately high rates of unemployment for women since the start of the pandemic, it may take decades for women to recover. And these disparities are far worse for women working in low-wage positions, Black women, and other women of color.
All of this explains why Ginsburg might well have decided to take on a case like van Soeren’s. As Ginsburg famously said, “Women will only have true equality when men share with them the responsibility of bringing up the next generation.” Now more than ever, lawmakers across the country must work to make Ginsburg’s vision a reality by ensuring caregiving discrimination protections for all — regardless of gender.
Published November 12, 2020 at 09:30PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3eUGYHt
0 notes
Link
Philippines : Financial Sector Assessment Program-Detailed Assessment of Observance—Basel Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision
Published November 10, 2020 at 08:00AM
Read more at imf.org
0 notes
Link
Cabo Verde : Second Review Under the Policy Coordination Instrument and Request for Modification of Targets
Published November 10, 2020 at 08:00AM
Read more at imf.org
0 notes
Link
A Change in Administration Is Just A Starting Point For LGBTQ Justice
This piece was originally published on Advocate.com.
Joe Biden’s election isn’t the end of our struggle for LGBTQ justice, it’s a new beginning. As hopeful as we are that the Biden/Harris administration will live up to its campaign promises to LGBTQ people, nothing is going to happen by itself. Our community needs to push hard not only to remedy the many harms that the Trump administration inflicted on us, but also to build a more expansive demand for justice from the federal government. We need to fight back against the extreme attacks we face in many states, and do damage control in the newly super conservative courts stacked with anti-LGBTQ judges. This is no time to let up.
The federal level: Un-doing the damage from Trump and creating stronger protections.
The Trump administration spent the last four years attacking LGBQ and especially transgender and non-binary people. The first thing we have to do is reverse these harmful policies. They range from the transgender military ban to a proposed rule that would allow homeless shelters to turn away trans people to the rescission of guidance for school districts about their obligations to prevent discrimination against LGBTQ youth.
We must all urge the new administration to swiftly root out each of these policies — and many more — from the federal rulebook. And then we need to go further and not just reverse Trump’s many regressive policies, but use the full power of the federal government to create more protections for LGBTQ people in all realms of society, from employment to housing to schools to prisons, jails, and immigration detention facilities.
These new protections should include the Equality Act, which will add express protections for LGBTQ people to the Civil Rights Act and also fill several important gaps in that law for all women and people of color. The federal government should also take steps to ensure that transgender and non-binary people have access to accurate identification documents, a move that would reduce the violence and harassment that many trans folks face.
Fighting attacks in the states.
Over the past several years we have seen anti-LGBTQ bills proposed repeatedly in state legislatures. With the defeat of Trump, many of the anti-LGBTQ advocates who have been able to advance their agenda through high positions in his administration will head back to the states, where they will bolster the dangerous efforts to attack LGBTQ people. We need to fight back.
The coming 2021 state legislative sessions are likely to include many anti-trans bills, such as proposals to criminalize doctors who provide gender affirming health care to transgender youth, or bills that would bar transgender people from participating in sports. We also anticipate a new wave of bills seeking to create religious exemptions that would license discrimination against LGBTQ people in a range of contexts from health care to schools.
We have to stop these attacks from taking hold at the state level. The ACLU will be educating members of state legislatures and the news media about why these proposals are discriminatory and harmful. And our offices in every state, D.C., and Puerto Rico will mobilize people to turn out at statehouses across the country and lobby their representatives to oppose these bills. This winter and spring will be an all-hands-on-deck moment for our community.
Doing damage control in the courts.
The Trump administration and the Republican-led Senate packed the federal courts — from the Supreme Court down through the lower federal courts — with extremely conservative judges, many of whom had clearly articulated anti-LGBTQ views. So we can’t count on the courts to protect LGBTQ rights in the way that they have sometimes done in the past.
The danger is not just that the courts will fail to recognize the rights of LGBTQ people under existing law. It’s that they may well rule that the U.S. Constitution grants anyone with a claimed religious objection to LGBTQ people, or even just an objection to being near a trans person, a right to discriminate. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case that could give a religiously affiliated, taxpayer-funded foster care agency a constitutional right to discriminate against LGBTQ people when performing a government service. That’s terrifying.
To fight this, the ACLU will prioritize getting involved in the cases seeking a constitutional right to discriminate and do our best to do damage control wherever possible.
There are still fair-minded judges on the federal bench who will follow the law. For example, back in June, the Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that federal law bars anti-LGBTQ discrimination in the workplace, recognizing that anti-LGBTQ discrimination is a form of sex discrimination. In the few months that followed, five federal courts ruled in favor of transgender plaintiffs raising claims of sex discrimination in health care, schools, and sports. That gives me hope for the role the courts can still play in our movement.
Those courts could rule for the transgender plaintiffs in significant part because of how much the country has learned over the past few years about the reality of transgender people’s lives. That education happened because transgender people shared their stories with the courts and thousands of voices — from parents and friends to doctors, business owners and teachers — shared that protecting people from discrimination is a basic American value, and one that doesn’t harm anyone else.
We can still make progress if we work together. If we as a community stay engaged and fight for each other and for other communities who are facing attacks, we can fix the damage at the federal level and create even better protections for LGBTQ people going forward. We can stop the anti-LGBTQ bills that will be proposed in the states. And we can work in the courts both to do damage control and to seek progress where-ever we can.
But to realize all of this promise requires us to reinvigorate our activism, rather than to rest on our laurels or to assume that someone else will take care of the work. It’s up to us. Together, we can do it.
Published November 10, 2020 at 08:00PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3n9beRO
0 notes
Link
A Change in Administration Is Just A Starting Point For LGBTQ Justice
This piece was originally published on Advocate.com.
Joe Biden’s election isn’t the end of our struggle for LGBTQ justice, it’s a new beginning. As hopeful as we are that the Biden/Harris administration will live up to its campaign promises to LGBTQ people, nothing is going to happen by itself. Our community needs to push hard not only to remedy the many harms that the Trump administration inflicted on us, but also to build a more expansive demand for justice from the federal government. We need to fight back against the extreme attacks we face in many states, and do damage control in the newly super conservative courts stacked with anti-LGBTQ judges. This is no time to let up.
The federal level: Un-doing the damage from Trump and creating stronger protections.
The Trump administration spent the last four years attacking LGBQ and especially transgender and non-binary people. The first thing we have to do is reverse these harmful policies. They range from the transgender military ban to a proposed rule that would allow homeless shelters to turn away trans people to the rescission of guidance for school districts about their obligations to prevent discrimination against LGBTQ youth.
We must all urge the new administration to swiftly root out each of these policies — and many more — from the federal rulebook. And then we need to go further and not just reverse Trump’s many regressive policies, but use the full power of the federal government to create more protections for LGBTQ people in all realms of society, from employment to housing to schools to prisons, jails, and immigration detention facilities.
These new protections should include the Equality Act, which will add express protections for LGBTQ people to the Civil Rights Act and also fill several important gaps in that law for all women and people of color. The federal government should also take steps to ensure that transgender and non-binary people have access to accurate identification documents, a move that would reduce the violence and harassment that many trans folks face.
Fighting attacks in the states.
Over the past several years we have seen anti-LGBTQ bills proposed repeatedly in state legislatures. With the defeat of Trump, many of the anti-LGBTQ advocates who have been able to advance their agenda through high positions in his administration will head back to the states, where they will bolster the dangerous efforts to attack LGBTQ people. We need to fight back.
The coming 2021 state legislative sessions are likely to include many anti-trans bills, such as proposals to criminalize doctors who provide gender affirming health care to transgender youth, or bills that would bar transgender people from participating in sports. We also anticipate a new wave of bills seeking to create religious exemptions that would license discrimination against LGBTQ people in a range of contexts from health care to schools.
We have to stop these attacks from taking hold at the state level. The ACLU will be educating members of state legislatures and the news media about why these proposals are discriminatory and harmful. And our offices in every state, D.C., and Puerto Rico will mobilize people to turn out at statehouses across the country and lobby their representatives to oppose these bills. This winter and spring will be an all-hands-on-deck moment for our community.
Doing damage control in the courts.
The Trump administration and the Republican-led Senate packed the federal courts — from the Supreme Court down through the lower federal courts — with extremely conservative judges, many of whom had clearly articulated anti-LGBTQ views. So we can’t count on the courts to protect LGBTQ rights in the way that they have sometimes done in the past.
The danger is not just that the courts will fail to recognize the rights of LGBTQ people under existing law. It’s that they may well rule that the U.S. Constitution grants anyone with a claimed religious objection to LGBTQ people, or even just an objection to being near a trans person, a right to discriminate. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case that could give a religiously affiliated, taxpayer-funded foster care agency a constitutional right to discriminate against LGBTQ people when performing a government service. That’s terrifying.
To fight this, the ACLU will prioritize getting involved in the cases seeking a constitutional right to discriminate and do our best to do damage control wherever possible.
There are still fair-minded judges on the federal bench who will follow the law. For example, back in June, the Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that federal law bars anti-LGBTQ discrimination in the workplace, recognizing that anti-LGBTQ discrimination is a form of sex discrimination. In the few months that followed, five federal courts ruled in favor of transgender plaintiffs raising claims of sex discrimination in health care, schools, and sports. That gives me hope for the role the courts can still play in our movement.
Those courts could rule for the transgender plaintiffs in significant part because of how much the country has learned over the past few years about the reality of transgender people’s lives. That education happened because transgender people shared their stories with the courts and thousands of voices — from parents and friends to doctors, business owners and teachers — shared that protecting people from discrimination is a basic American value, and one that doesn’t harm anyone else.
We can still make progress if we work together. If we as a community stay engaged and fight for each other and for other communities who are facing attacks, we can fix the damage at the federal level and create even better protections for LGBTQ people going forward. We can stop the anti-LGBTQ bills that will be proposed in the states. And we can work in the courts both to do damage control and to seek progress where-ever we can.
But to realize all of this promise requires us to reinvigorate our activism, rather than to rest on our laurels or to assume that someone else will take care of the work. It’s up to us. Together, we can do it.
Published November 11, 2020 at 01:30AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3n9beRO
0 notes
Link
Securing Tenants’ Right to Counsel is Critical to Fighting Mass Evictions
On election night, voters in Boulder, Colorado delivered a critical win in the fight for housing justice. By a margin of 59-41 percent, voters passed No Eviction Without Representation (NEWR) — a critical measure that will ensure all Boulder tenants who are facing the terrifying, complex process that is an eviction proceeding will be provided with free legal representation. NEWR also establishes a rental assistance fund and an education process that will notify Boulder renters of their housing rights.
Protections like those afforded by NEWR are always important, but they are particularly crucial in the midst of a devastating global pandemic. The economic consequences of the pandemic have cost millions of people across the country their jobs and the ability to pay the rent — leaving millions of renters with the added threat of eviction and losing their homes.
The odds are stacked heavily against tenants who are taken to eviction court. Less than 2 percent of renters in Boulder who are summoned to court are able to find or afford legal representation. This is not surprising considering many are facing eviction because of unforeseen circumstances or financial stress that prevents them from being able to afford their rent. Meanwhile, the vast majority of landlords are armed with legal representation and the protection of professional organizations that lobby on their behalf. Many renters don’t even get to the courthouse because of the severe financial burdens they already bear.
With the passage of NEWR, Boulder becomes the seventh city in the country with a right to counsel program. Other cities that have adopted right to counsel measures in eviction proceedings — including New York City and San Francisco — have seen reductions in evictions. In securing a universal right to counsel in eviction proceedings, NEWR will ensure that renters have the tools and knowledge they need to safeguard their housing rights and help balance power between landlords and tenants.
Where does the fight for housing justice in the form of right to counsel head now?
On Tuesday, the Baltimore City Council will hold a hearing on a right to counsel bill. Passage of this legislation is critically important. Baltimore currently has one of the highest eviction rates in the United States. Approximately 70,000 eviction orders are issued in Baltimore every year, resulting in thousands of evictions. Unsurprisingly, 96 percent of landlords are represented by a lawyer in eviction cases in the city while the same is true for just 1 percent of renters. A recent report found that a right to counsel program like NEWR in Baltimore could cut evictions by 92 percent. Furthermore, the report estimates that every dollar Baltimore spends on providing free legal representation in eviction cases would result in more than $3 in savings on social safety net resources.
Ending mass evictions is a key racial and gender justice priority. Due to decades of inequalities in our housing system, communities of color and low-income women feel the impacts of eviction the most — Black women in particular. The numbers say it all: Black women are more than twice as likely to have evictions filed against them as white people. Less than half of Black and Latinx families own their homes compared to 73 percent of white families. Longstanding systemic income and wealth inequality also put communities of color at higher risk of eviction.
The harms of eviction also run deep — having an eviction on your record can make it difficult to secure future housing since some landlords will not consider a prospective renter with a past eviction. Eviction marginalizes and stigmatizes already vulnerable groups with limited financial means.
With the federal eviction moratorium set to lift before the end of the year and no federal emergency rent relief in sight, it is paramount for Congress, states, and cities to act. As the voters of Boulder showed us on Election Day, right to counsel programs are one important step that can be taken to keep people in their homes. We need action to stop mass evictions during the pandemic and beyond. All people — regardless of their circumstances or background — should have access to safe and stable housing.
Published November 10, 2020 at 01:50AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3kfB7xe
0 notes
Link
Securing Tenants’ Right to Counsel is Critical to Fighting Mass Evictions
On election night, voters in Boulder, Colorado delivered a critical win in the fight for housing justice. By a margin of 59-41 percent, voters passed No Eviction Without Representation (NEWR) — a critical measure that will ensure all Boulder tenants who are facing the terrifying, complex process that is an eviction proceeding will be provided with free legal representation. NEWR also establishes a rental assistance fund and an education process that will notify Boulder renters of their housing rights.
Protections like those afforded by NEWR are always important, but they are particularly crucial in the midst of a devastating global pandemic. The economic consequences of the pandemic have cost millions of people across the country their jobs and the ability to pay the rent — leaving millions of renters with the added threat of eviction and losing their homes.
The odds are stacked heavily against tenants who are taken to eviction court. Less than 2 percent of renters in Boulder who are summoned to court are able to find or afford legal representation. This is not surprising considering many are facing eviction because of unforeseen circumstances or financial stress that prevents them from being able to afford their rent. Meanwhile, the vast majority of landlords are armed with legal representation and the protection of professional organizations that lobby on their behalf. Many renters don’t even get to the courthouse because of the severe financial burdens they already bear.
With the passage of NEWR, Boulder becomes the seventh city in the country with a right to counsel program. Other cities that have adopted right to counsel measures in eviction proceedings — including New York City and San Francisco — have seen reductions in evictions. In securing a universal right to counsel in eviction proceedings, NEWR will ensure that renters have the tools and knowledge they need to safeguard their housing rights and help balance power between landlords and tenants.
Where does the fight for housing justice in the form of right to counsel head now?
On Tuesday, the Baltimore City Council will hold a hearing on a right to counsel bill. Passage of this legislation is critically important. Baltimore currently has one of the highest eviction rates in the United States. Approximately 70,000 eviction orders are issued in Baltimore every year, resulting in thousands of evictions. Unsurprisingly, 96 percent of landlords are represented by a lawyer in eviction cases in the city while the same is true for just 1 percent of renters. A recent report found that a right to counsel program like NEWR in Baltimore could cut evictions by 92 percent. Furthermore, the report estimates that every dollar Baltimore spends on providing free legal representation in eviction cases would result in more than $3 in savings on social safety net resources.
Ending mass evictions is a key racial and gender justice priority. Due to decades of inequalities in our housing system, communities of color and low-income women feel the impacts of eviction the most — Black women in particular. The numbers say it all: Black women are more than twice as likely to have evictions filed against them as white people. Less than half of Black and Latinx families own their homes compared to 73 percent of white families. Longstanding systemic income and wealth inequality also put communities of color at higher risk of eviction.
The harms of eviction also run deep — having an eviction on your record can make it difficult to secure future housing since some landlords will not consider a prospective renter with a past eviction. Eviction marginalizes and stigmatizes already vulnerable groups with limited financial means.
With the federal eviction moratorium set to lift before the end of the year and no federal emergency rent relief in sight, it is paramount for Congress, states, and cities to act. As the voters of Boulder showed us on Election Day, right to counsel programs are one important step that can be taken to keep people in their homes. We need action to stop mass evictions during the pandemic and beyond. All people — regardless of their circumstances or background — should have access to safe and stable housing.
Published November 9, 2020 at 08:20PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/3kfB7xe
0 notes