The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit today upheld the right of transgender people to receive medical care while they are incarcerated. The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Wisconsin and Lambda Legal had challenged a Wisconsin law that prohibited prison doctors from prescribing hormone treatment or sex reassignment surgery to transgender inmates.
“This was a discriminatory law that cruelly singled out transgender people by denying them – and only them – the medical care they need,” said John Knight, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project. “Too often the medical needs of transgender persons are not treated as the serious health issues that they are. We are glad that the appeals court has found that medical professionals, not the Wisconsin legislature, should make medical decisions for inmates.”
The appeals court wrote: “Surely, had the Wisconsin legislature passed a law that DOC inmates with cancer must be treated only with therapy and pain killers, this court would have no trouble concluding that the law was unconstitutional. Refusing to provide effective treatment for a serious medical condition serves no valid penological purpose and amounts to torture.”
In 2005, the state of Wisconsin passed a law that barred prison doctors from providing transgender inmates medically necessary hormone therapy or sex reassignment surgery while in state custody. The ACLU, the ACLU of Wisconsin and Lambda Legal sued the state on behalf of transgender inmates, some of whom had been receiving hormone treatment in Wisconsin prisons for years. An injunction was granted to continue hormone treatment until a ruling was made. In April 2010, after a full trial, a federal district court struck down the so-called “Inmate Sex Change Prevention Act.”
“The court correctly ruled that denying prisoners medical treatment constitutes cruel and unusual punishment,” said Dru Levasseur, Lambda Legal’s transgender rights attorney. “The medical needs of transgender people don’t disappear once they enter prison. We’re glad that the court has ruled that the legislature cannot outlaw the only effective treatment for some people with Gender Identity Disorder.”
“This decision should make it abundantly clear that it is unconstitutional to deny transgender inmates hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery absent a medical basis for doing so,” said Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin.
Read more about this case including the text of the court's decision on the American Civil Liberties Union Fields v. Smith case profile page or on Lambda Legal's case page.
Media coverage of the court victory included stories in the Wisconsin State Journal (AP wire stories ran in Chicago, the Twin Cities and other areas in the country), Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the Advocate, the Wall Street Journal law blog and LGBT-related blogs around the country.
Showing posts with label LGBT rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LGBT rights. Show all posts
Monday, August 8, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
WI Domestic Partner Registry Not a Violation of State Same-Sex Marriage Ban
Judge Daniel Moeser resoundingly rejected today an attack on Wisconsin’s Domestic Partner Registry brought by Board members of Wisconsin Family Action, an organization whose members pushed for Wisconsin’s anti-Marriage constitutional amendment in 2006. Despite securing passage of the amendment by assuring voters that domestic partnerships would still be allowed, the Wisconsin Family Action plaintiffs asserted that the anti-Marriage amendment prohibited the Domestic Partner law passed by the legislature in 2008 to provide crucial but very limited protections to same-sex couples.
“While, as the court recognized, the domestic partnership law is in no way equivalent to marriage, it is a lifeline for committed couples who seek the security and dignity of being able to provide for their families,” said John Knight of the ACLU’s LGBT & AIDS project.
In a well-reasoned 55-page opinion, Judge Moeser noted that proponents of the anti-Marriage amendment had repeatedly insisted that the amendment was about preventing same-sex marriage and “look-alike” civil unions that were marriage in everything but name, and reassured voters that it would not prevent domestic partnership laws.
The Judge also recognized that the few protections available under the Domestic Partner law were in no way comparable to the extensive rights and privileges that go along with marriage. Wisconsin’s law allows for same-sex couples to register as domestic partners, granting them hospital visitation rights, the right to make certain decisions about medical care and rights to family and medical leave. Same-sex couples are still denied crucial protections provided only to married couples, such as the right to decide what happens to their partner’s body at death, and are denied access to all federal benefits, such as Social Security and veterans’ benefits.
The Judge also recognized that the few protections available under the Domestic Partner law were in no way comparable to the extensive rights and privileges that go along with marriage. Wisconsin’s law allows for same-sex couples to register as domestic partners, granting them hospital visitation rights, the right to make certain decisions about medical care and rights to family and medical leave. Same-sex couples are still denied crucial protections provided only to married couples, such as the right to decide what happens to their partner’s body at death, and are denied access to all federal benefits, such as Social Security and veterans’ benefits.
Larry Dupuis, the legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin, added, “The court rightly rejected this mean-spirited and dishonest attack on gay and lesbian couples. Our clients know what it’s like to worry about not being able to visit a partner in the hospital or to be left with nothing when a partner dies without a will. The protections offered by the domestic partner law at least allay some of those fears.”
Government officials initially defended the domestic partner registry against the lawsuit, but Governor Scott Walker’s administration abandoned the defense. That left several same-sex couples, Fair Wisconsin, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU as a friend of the court, to defend domestic partnerships.
Attorneys on the case include Knight of the ACLU, Dupuis of the ACLU of Wisconsin and David J.B. Froiland, Linda E.B. Hansen, Daniel A. Manna and David B. Goroff of Foley & Lardner LLP.
Please visit the ACLU's Appling v. Doyle page for more information on our involvement in this challenge including support documents such as our amicus brief. You can also find a link to the full text of the Circuit Court Judge's decision on the ACLU of Wisconsin website.
News coverage of today's breaking news was included in newspapers statewide including the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Wisconsin State Journal, the Wisconsin Gazette, Reuters, AP, the Chippewa Herald and the Capital Times. The AP story also ran in the Washington Post.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Gay-Straight Alliance in West Bend School Approved - But It Shouldn't Take a Lawsuit to Support LGBT Youth
On Monday, the board of the West Bend School District narrowly voted in favor of allowing a Gay-Straight Alliance at their high school. The ACLU of Wisconsin was there to live-tweet from the meeting (you can see the tweets on the @ACLUofWisconsin Twitter page). Many LGBT rights advocates are applauding the victory this week. Unfortunately, the school board’s narrow vote came about, not because it was simply the right thing to do for equality and freedom of expression and association, but because a potentially costly lawsuit has forced them to acknowledge that the law is against them.
When the school board originally voted in May to not allow the club official recognition, lawyers on behalf of students who wanted to start a Gay-Straight Alliance filed a lawsuit in federal district court to overturn the board’s decision on the basis that it violated both federal equal access protections and first amendment rights. As a public school that receives federal funding, the West Bend School District must not have policies that discriminate against students or deny them basic rights.
Students at West Bend have been trying to organize a GSA for nearly a decade but have faced one barrier after another (the legal complaint tells the students’ compelling story). It is unfortunate that it took a lawsuit for the school board to make a decision that recognizes all student clubs. But their decision could have been better. They could have voted unanimously in support of the club. They could have taken a strong public stand against discrimination and bullying.
On Monday, the West Bend School Board barely approved a decision that should have been made in support of their diverse student body back in 2000. But from this point on, we expect the best in accommodation and support for the GSA in West Bend. The West Bend School district needs a real process to not just approve but cultivate student clubs and promote leadership development in a way that is clear, fair and consistent. Teachers who champion diversity should be applauded, not criticized. Perhaps school board seats in the future will be filled by community members who represent and protect all students, rather than a narrow ideology.
The school board vote got media coverage on the AP wire, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, TMJ-4, Fox News 6 (both with video) and WISN. The Department of Education also recently reminded public schools that Gay-Straight Alliances have the right to organize.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
“Sensitive Issues:” Myths vs. Facts about the new Sex Ed Law
Sex Ed in Wisconsin: New State Standards
The Healthy Youth Act, a new law passed earlier this year that the ACLU of Wisconsin supported, raises the state standards for how public schools offer human growth and development courses. Now if schools offer sex ed, it should be non-discriminatory, fact-based, age-appropriate, and comprehensive in covering the benefits and function of FDA-approved methods of birth control. The comprehensive approach to sex ed is the most effective way to teach young people the facts about human sexuality so that they can make healthy choices in their adolescence and into their adult lives.
Since the new law was passed, and in the wake of the Cedarburg School District decision to segregate "sensitive issues" by requiring parents to opt their children into a comprehensive program, opponents of the Healthy Youth Act have promoted myths about the rights of parents and schools. Cedarburg's decision has been criticized by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, by a physician and Cedarburg curriculum advisory committee and the District of Public Instruction.
And yet, social conservatives like op-ed writer Patrick McIlheran (in his Journal Sentinel column), GermantownNOW blogger Al Campbell and Charlie Sykes (on his October 19th show - part 3) are calling the new law an "oppressive" effort for the state to take power away from parents and school boards.
The Myth of Decreased Parental Control
First, critics suggest that parents don’t have control over their kids’ education regarding sex ed. The Healthy Youth Act continues to protect the right of parents to exempt their children from material they find objectionable. When a school district has a clear plan for human growth and development lessons, parents have the power to work with the school to make alternative arrangements. Additionally, the new law gives parents greater power in reviewing the curriculum at any time. Schools have the responsibility to ensure that exempted students have an equal, alternative assignment and do not face any grade penalty or discrimination for opting out. It is also common for parents to serve on the local school board’s curriculum advisory committees, as they do in the public meetings in Cedarburg. Parents’ rights and voices continue to be protected in the new law. But the law recognizes that young people and our state’s public health benefit when complete information about sexual health is offered to all students in our schools.
The Myth of Decreased Local Control
Critics also say that the law decreases local control over a school’s curriculum. This is hardly the case. The law raised state standards to ensure that young people receive information about reproduction and relationships that is comprehensive, fact-based and non-discriminatory. However the decision on how curriculum is designed and taught continues to rest in the hands of the instruction advisory committees and the school board members themselves. The Healthy Youth Act doesn’t require schools to teach human growth and development, but then schools would have to inform parents about the lack of education their children would receive. While evidence-based curricula packages are available to schools, the state Department of Public Instruction’s website has a toolkit that has resources for both schools and parents to teach human growth and development that works for their community. The state law outlines definitions but does not mandate a one-size-fits-all curriculum.
The Myth of Explicit Classroom Instruction
Reading opinion from social conservatives, one might think that the Healthy Youth Act is mandating that our local schools peddle pornography to children. But when the voices of criticism of comprehensive sexuality education come from radical, anti-contraception organizations like Pro-Life Wisconsin, misinformation needs to be countered with basic facts about the language of the new law.
The state law says that instruction must be “medically accurate” which means that it is based in science, approved by major medical journals and that instruction is reviewed by experts. Instruction must be “age-appropriate” or “suitable to a particular age group of pupils based on cognitive and emotional capacity.” School board members across the state might struggle with what they think age-appropriate means to them, but with puberty and adolescence come questions and young people deserve to get the facts about human sexuality.
State law does not require schools to “teach homosexuality.” The law does, however, require that instruction is free of bias against pupils of any race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnic or cultural background or against sexually active pupils or children with disabilities. In the wake of recent suicides of gay teens and the attention paid to preventing bullying and discrimination based on real or perceived sexual orientation or non-traditional gender identity, classroom time devoted to teaching respect would do all Wisconsin schools some good. Wisconsin schools that offer comprehensive sexuality education should include time for discussion on the issues faced by LGBT youth and how schools can be safe places for everyone regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
State law does not require schools to “teach masturbation.” No place in the law mentions the word “masturbation,” nor does it define masturbation as a normal part of a healthy human sexuality. The law does say that instruction should include information about “reproductive and sexual anatomy and physiology, including biological, psychosocial and emotional changes that accompany maturation.” When proponents of abstinence-only instruction critique a comprehensive approach, do they believe that students would have fewer questions about masturbation if they receive no answers to their questions about relationships, reproduction or contraception?
What Parents, Teachers and Youth Rights Advocates Can Do
Download our resource pages (PDF) with "Questions for Parents to Ask About Sex Education" and "Ten Ways to Work for Comprehensive Sexuality Education." Teachers and curriculum advisory committee members can visit the Department of Public Instruction's webpage on human growth curriculum for more information on how to design lesson plans that work and nondiscriminatory. The ACLU of Wisconsin also has resources to share with teachers for effective lesson plans that can meet the improved state standards for schools across the state. Email the ACLU of Wisconsin for more information.
The Healthy Youth Act, a new law passed earlier this year that the ACLU of Wisconsin supported, raises the state standards for how public schools offer human growth and development courses. Now if schools offer sex ed, it should be non-discriminatory, fact-based, age-appropriate, and comprehensive in covering the benefits and function of FDA-approved methods of birth control. The comprehensive approach to sex ed is the most effective way to teach young people the facts about human sexuality so that they can make healthy choices in their adolescence and into their adult lives.
Since the new law was passed, and in the wake of the Cedarburg School District decision to segregate "sensitive issues" by requiring parents to opt their children into a comprehensive program, opponents of the Healthy Youth Act have promoted myths about the rights of parents and schools. Cedarburg's decision has been criticized by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, by a physician and Cedarburg curriculum advisory committee and the District of Public Instruction.
And yet, social conservatives like op-ed writer Patrick McIlheran (in his Journal Sentinel column), GermantownNOW blogger Al Campbell and Charlie Sykes (on his October 19th show - part 3) are calling the new law an "oppressive" effort for the state to take power away from parents and school boards.
The Myth of Decreased Parental Control
First, critics suggest that parents don’t have control over their kids’ education regarding sex ed. The Healthy Youth Act continues to protect the right of parents to exempt their children from material they find objectionable. When a school district has a clear plan for human growth and development lessons, parents have the power to work with the school to make alternative arrangements. Additionally, the new law gives parents greater power in reviewing the curriculum at any time. Schools have the responsibility to ensure that exempted students have an equal, alternative assignment and do not face any grade penalty or discrimination for opting out. It is also common for parents to serve on the local school board’s curriculum advisory committees, as they do in the public meetings in Cedarburg. Parents’ rights and voices continue to be protected in the new law. But the law recognizes that young people and our state’s public health benefit when complete information about sexual health is offered to all students in our schools.
The Myth of Decreased Local Control
Critics also say that the law decreases local control over a school’s curriculum. This is hardly the case. The law raised state standards to ensure that young people receive information about reproduction and relationships that is comprehensive, fact-based and non-discriminatory. However the decision on how curriculum is designed and taught continues to rest in the hands of the instruction advisory committees and the school board members themselves. The Healthy Youth Act doesn’t require schools to teach human growth and development, but then schools would have to inform parents about the lack of education their children would receive. While evidence-based curricula packages are available to schools, the state Department of Public Instruction’s website has a toolkit that has resources for both schools and parents to teach human growth and development that works for their community. The state law outlines definitions but does not mandate a one-size-fits-all curriculum.
The Myth of Explicit Classroom Instruction
Reading opinion from social conservatives, one might think that the Healthy Youth Act is mandating that our local schools peddle pornography to children. But when the voices of criticism of comprehensive sexuality education come from radical, anti-contraception organizations like Pro-Life Wisconsin, misinformation needs to be countered with basic facts about the language of the new law.
The state law says that instruction must be “medically accurate” which means that it is based in science, approved by major medical journals and that instruction is reviewed by experts. Instruction must be “age-appropriate” or “suitable to a particular age group of pupils based on cognitive and emotional capacity.” School board members across the state might struggle with what they think age-appropriate means to them, but with puberty and adolescence come questions and young people deserve to get the facts about human sexuality.
State law does not require schools to “teach homosexuality.” The law does, however, require that instruction is free of bias against pupils of any race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnic or cultural background or against sexually active pupils or children with disabilities. In the wake of recent suicides of gay teens and the attention paid to preventing bullying and discrimination based on real or perceived sexual orientation or non-traditional gender identity, classroom time devoted to teaching respect would do all Wisconsin schools some good. Wisconsin schools that offer comprehensive sexuality education should include time for discussion on the issues faced by LGBT youth and how schools can be safe places for everyone regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
State law does not require schools to “teach masturbation.” No place in the law mentions the word “masturbation,” nor does it define masturbation as a normal part of a healthy human sexuality. The law does say that instruction should include information about “reproductive and sexual anatomy and physiology, including biological, psychosocial and emotional changes that accompany maturation.” When proponents of abstinence-only instruction critique a comprehensive approach, do they believe that students would have fewer questions about masturbation if they receive no answers to their questions about relationships, reproduction or contraception?
What Parents, Teachers and Youth Rights Advocates Can Do
Download our resource pages (PDF) with "Questions for Parents to Ask About Sex Education" and "Ten Ways to Work for Comprehensive Sexuality Education." Teachers and curriculum advisory committee members can visit the Department of Public Instruction's webpage on human growth curriculum for more information on how to design lesson plans that work and nondiscriminatory. The ACLU of Wisconsin also has resources to share with teachers for effective lesson plans that can meet the improved state standards for schools across the state. Email the ACLU of Wisconsin for more information.
Friday, October 1, 2010
ACLU Urges WI Court to Allow Registered Domestic Partners to Speak in Support of DP Law
Couples Seek To Help Defend Lawsuit Challenging Wisconsin’s Domestic Partner Law
On Friday, October 1, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a motion before a Dane County Circuit Court on behalf of five couples asking that they be allowed to participate in a lawsuit seeking to overturn Wisconsin’s law granting limited domestic partnership protections to same-sex couples, so that they may defend the law. The law is being challenged by an anti-gay organization that contends that the law grants same-sex couples the same status as marriage, which is barred by the Wisconsin Constitution.
“Same-sex couples who have registered as domestic partners have the most at stake in this lawsuit and deserve to be heard,” said John Knight, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Project. “Only those directly affected by the law know what it’s like to worry about not being able to visit a partner in the hospital or to be left with nothing when a partner dies without a will.”
Wisconsin’s law allows for same-sex couples to register as domestic partners, granting them hospital visitation rights, the right to make certain decisions about medical care and rights to family and medical leave. Same-sex couples are still denied crucial protections provided only to married couples, such as the right to decide what happens to their partner’s body at death, and are denied access to all federal benefits, such as Social Security and veterans’ benefits.
Board members of Wisconsin Family Action had asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex couples from marriage. The case, Appling v. Doyle, was dismissed by the state Supreme Court and re-filed in the circuit court, where both sides will be able to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“While the domestic partnership law in no way provides the same benefits and legal protections as marriage, it is a lifeline for committed couples who seek the security and dignity of being able to provide for their families,” said Larry Dupuis of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “These couples have the right to defend these limited, but extremely important, protections against this unwarranted and mean-spirited attack.”
Also today, Lambda Legal also filed court papers today to intervene in the case on behalf of Fair Wisconsin and five member couples, saying that domestic partnerships and marriages are not “substantially similar.”
Attorneys on the case include Knight of the ACLU, Dupuis of the ACLU of Wisconsin and David J.B. Froiland, Linda E.B. Hansen, Daniel A. Manna and David B. Goroff of Foley & Lardner LLP.
Additional information about the case, including bios of the couples and legal documents, is available online.
On Friday, October 1, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a motion before a Dane County Circuit Court on behalf of five couples asking that they be allowed to participate in a lawsuit seeking to overturn Wisconsin’s law granting limited domestic partnership protections to same-sex couples, so that they may defend the law. The law is being challenged by an anti-gay organization that contends that the law grants same-sex couples the same status as marriage, which is barred by the Wisconsin Constitution.
“Same-sex couples who have registered as domestic partners have the most at stake in this lawsuit and deserve to be heard,” said John Knight, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Project. “Only those directly affected by the law know what it’s like to worry about not being able to visit a partner in the hospital or to be left with nothing when a partner dies without a will.”
Wisconsin’s law allows for same-sex couples to register as domestic partners, granting them hospital visitation rights, the right to make certain decisions about medical care and rights to family and medical leave. Same-sex couples are still denied crucial protections provided only to married couples, such as the right to decide what happens to their partner’s body at death, and are denied access to all federal benefits, such as Social Security and veterans’ benefits.
Board members of Wisconsin Family Action had asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex couples from marriage. The case, Appling v. Doyle, was dismissed by the state Supreme Court and re-filed in the circuit court, where both sides will be able to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“While the domestic partnership law in no way provides the same benefits and legal protections as marriage, it is a lifeline for committed couples who seek the security and dignity of being able to provide for their families,” said Larry Dupuis of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “These couples have the right to defend these limited, but extremely important, protections against this unwarranted and mean-spirited attack.”
Also today, Lambda Legal also filed court papers today to intervene in the case on behalf of Fair Wisconsin and five member couples, saying that domestic partnerships and marriages are not “substantially similar.”
Attorneys on the case include Knight of the ACLU, Dupuis of the ACLU of Wisconsin and David J.B. Froiland, Linda E.B. Hansen, Daniel A. Manna and David B. Goroff of Foley & Lardner LLP.
Additional information about the case, including bios of the couples and legal documents, is available online.
Friday, September 17, 2010
HOWL Film a Hit In Milwaukee - Answers the Question, "What Are Angel-Headed Hipsters?"
Over sixty people were unable to get seats to the "HOWL" film in Milwaukee Wednesday night. The sold-out event was filled to capacity with people who enjoyed a special advanced screening of the feature film about Allen Ginsberg’s poem and obscenity trial.
“The movie was an excellent blend of a depiction of the trial, an interview with Ginsberg as a monologue by Franco, and a staging of the first public reading of the poem,” said ACLU of Wisconsin staffer Marion Ecks. “I liked how it combined animation and film in a creative and moving way. The cast did an excellent job and Franco really captured Ginsburg’s manners and voice.”
The ACLU of Wisconsin Foundation co-presented the event along with the Woodland Pattern Book Center, the Milwaukee Public Library, Milwaukee LGBT Film Festival and the UW-Milwaukee Libraries. ACLU staff and volunteers were on hand to meet fellow card-carrying members (who got a discounted ticket price) and give updates about our activities in the state. We met librarians, faculty, activists and local politicians who seemed to all have a story to share about a beloved, challenged book or a civil liberties issue they cared about.
“It was a bit of a love fest for literary folks, book lovers, poets, Beat fans and libertarians,” said staffer Angie Vasquez. “I got to meet the Kenosha-area author of “Dharma Lion: A Critical Biography of Allen Ginsberg,” Michael Schumacher, who led a Q & A after the film. Raised in Milwaukee, Schumacher went to parochial school and when his teachers said ‘don’t read this book, “Howl,”’ he went out and bought it right away and became a life-long fan of the Beat Generation. What a story.”
Vasquez was a part of the program before the film started. She thanked the audience and told them that we were excited to be a part of the evening, especially since the ACLU played such an important role in defending HOWL in the trial. She read a segment of Ginsberg’s work which is also used as an example of the power of poetry in a workshop Vasquez presented at last year’s Youth Social Justice Forum in Milwaukee.
She reminded the crowd that the ACLU of Wisconsin will be recognizing Banned Books Week at an event at the Woodland Pattern Book Center on the evening of October 1st. A Banned Books Week happy hour will happen in Madison on October 1st at Mickey's Tavern. "HOWL" will have selected release dates across the country this fall including in Madison at the Sundance Theater on October 29th.
"HOWL" is just one of the controversial works the ACLU has defended in court. Read more about the history of the ACLU's work to defend banned books.
“The movie was an excellent blend of a depiction of the trial, an interview with Ginsberg as a monologue by Franco, and a staging of the first public reading of the poem,” said ACLU of Wisconsin staffer Marion Ecks. “I liked how it combined animation and film in a creative and moving way. The cast did an excellent job and Franco really captured Ginsburg’s manners and voice.”
The ACLU of Wisconsin Foundation co-presented the event along with the Woodland Pattern Book Center, the Milwaukee Public Library, Milwaukee LGBT Film Festival and the UW-Milwaukee Libraries. ACLU staff and volunteers were on hand to meet fellow card-carrying members (who got a discounted ticket price) and give updates about our activities in the state. We met librarians, faculty, activists and local politicians who seemed to all have a story to share about a beloved, challenged book or a civil liberties issue they cared about.
“It was a bit of a love fest for literary folks, book lovers, poets, Beat fans and libertarians,” said staffer Angie Vasquez. “I got to meet the Kenosha-area author of “Dharma Lion: A Critical Biography of Allen Ginsberg,” Michael Schumacher, who led a Q & A after the film. Raised in Milwaukee, Schumacher went to parochial school and when his teachers said ‘don’t read this book, “Howl,”’ he went out and bought it right away and became a life-long fan of the Beat Generation. What a story.”
Vasquez was a part of the program before the film started. She thanked the audience and told them that we were excited to be a part of the evening, especially since the ACLU played such an important role in defending HOWL in the trial. She read a segment of Ginsberg’s work which is also used as an example of the power of poetry in a workshop Vasquez presented at last year’s Youth Social Justice Forum in Milwaukee.
She reminded the crowd that the ACLU of Wisconsin will be recognizing Banned Books Week at an event at the Woodland Pattern Book Center on the evening of October 1st. A Banned Books Week happy hour will happen in Madison on October 1st at Mickey's Tavern. "HOWL" will have selected release dates across the country this fall including in Madison at the Sundance Theater on October 29th.
"HOWL" is just one of the controversial works the ACLU has defended in court. Read more about the history of the ACLU's work to defend banned books.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Happy ACLU Day! Ninety Years, Taycheedah Prison Conditions, Banned Books and More...
Happy ACLU day!
In NYC, Mayor Bloomberg issued a proclamation honoring the American Civil Liberties Union's 90th anniversary. It's a proclamation worth reading because it summarizes the long-term work for basic equality and protections for Americans by the ACLU. What a great milestone: our members and supporters all know that defending civil rights takes time, but the ACLU continues to take the long view to work for justice.
ACLU of WI Update
Here in Wisconsin, we're getting geared up for Banned Books Week. Listen in on a 20-minute interview on WORT-FM with ACLU of Wisconsin Madison Community Advocate Stacy Harbaugh talking about Banned Books Week plans, our legal victory for equal and adequate health care at the Taycheedah women's prison, the work to support public schools in implementing comprehensive sex ed and more. The interview was a part of WORT's commitment to spotlighting organizations like the ACLU of Wisconsin Foundation which are members of Community Shares of Wisconsin which provides fundraising and support for organizations dedicated to addressing social, economic, and environmental problems through grassroots activities, advocacy, research, and public education.
** One correction: the Madison Banned Books Week happy hour will be on Friday, October 1st. See below.
Tonight in Milwaukee, the ACLU of Wisconsin is co-presenting the feature film HOWL starring James Franco. The film will play at the UWM Union Theatre, 2nd level, 2200 E. Kenwood Blvd., 7:00 p.m. and ACLU members will get a discount on their movie tickets. The special advanced screening of HOWL depicts the life of Allen Ginsberg including Ginsberg’s arrest and prosecution for obscenity. Ginsberg was successfully defended by the ACLU in 1957 in this historic defense of a banned book. The ACLU of Wisconsin joins the Milwaukee LGBT Film Festival, the Woodland Pattern Book Center, the Milwaukee Public Library, Milwaukee Film and the UWM Libraries as co-presenters of this event in preparation for the 2010 Banned Books Week (September 25 – October 2) and the Milwaukee LGBT Film/Video Festival (October 21 – 24). For more information about the Milwaukee LGBT Film/Video Festival and HOWL admission cost, visit their website. You can view the trailer of the film on line or read more about the HOWL trial on the ACLU website.
Banned Books Week is coming up! Join us for these events:
October 1 , 2010 – Happy Hour: Banned Books Week kick-off
Mickey’s Tavern, 1524 Williamson St., 5:30 – 7:30 p.m., Madison
A part of the Wisconsin Book Festival’s line up, this celebration of the right to read will bring together readers, librarians and book defenders to socialize and hear some of the stories behind the most challenged books in Wisconsin and across the country this year. Join us for this free, fun event. RSVP for the event on Facebook and invite your friends.
October 1, 2010 – Banned Book Reading
Woodland Pattern Book Center, 720 E. Locust St., 6:30 p.m. reception, 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. program, Milwaukee
Join the ACLU of Wisconsin Foundation, Woodland Pattern Book Center, the Wisconsin Center for the Book and Art Night Books for a reading of challenged or banned works of art. Readers will be announced soon. To co-sponsor the event or to donate funds to help provide food and beverages, contact liberty@aclu-wi.org or call 414-272-4032 x 11. To see pictures of last year’s event, visit our blog.
In NYC, Mayor Bloomberg issued a proclamation honoring the American Civil Liberties Union's 90th anniversary. It's a proclamation worth reading because it summarizes the long-term work for basic equality and protections for Americans by the ACLU. What a great milestone: our members and supporters all know that defending civil rights takes time, but the ACLU continues to take the long view to work for justice.
ACLU of WI Update
Here in Wisconsin, we're getting geared up for Banned Books Week. Listen in on a 20-minute interview on WORT-FM with ACLU of Wisconsin Madison Community Advocate Stacy Harbaugh talking about Banned Books Week plans, our legal victory for equal and adequate health care at the Taycheedah women's prison, the work to support public schools in implementing comprehensive sex ed and more. The interview was a part of WORT's commitment to spotlighting organizations like the ACLU of Wisconsin Foundation which are members of Community Shares of Wisconsin which provides fundraising and support for organizations dedicated to addressing social, economic, and environmental problems through grassroots activities, advocacy, research, and public education.
** One correction: the Madison Banned Books Week happy hour will be on Friday, October 1st. See below.
Tonight in Milwaukee, the ACLU of Wisconsin is co-presenting the feature film HOWL starring James Franco. The film will play at the UWM Union Theatre, 2nd level, 2200 E. Kenwood Blvd., 7:00 p.m. and ACLU members will get a discount on their movie tickets. The special advanced screening of HOWL depicts the life of Allen Ginsberg including Ginsberg’s arrest and prosecution for obscenity. Ginsberg was successfully defended by the ACLU in 1957 in this historic defense of a banned book. The ACLU of Wisconsin joins the Milwaukee LGBT Film Festival, the Woodland Pattern Book Center, the Milwaukee Public Library, Milwaukee Film and the UWM Libraries as co-presenters of this event in preparation for the 2010 Banned Books Week (September 25 – October 2) and the Milwaukee LGBT Film/Video Festival (October 21 – 24). For more information about the Milwaukee LGBT Film/Video Festival and HOWL admission cost, visit their website. You can view the trailer of the film on line or read more about the HOWL trial on the ACLU website.
Banned Books Week is coming up! Join us for these events:
October 1 , 2010 – Happy Hour: Banned Books Week kick-off
Mickey’s Tavern, 1524 Williamson St., 5:30 – 7:30 p.m., Madison
A part of the Wisconsin Book Festival’s line up, this celebration of the right to read will bring together readers, librarians and book defenders to socialize and hear some of the stories behind the most challenged books in Wisconsin and across the country this year. Join us for this free, fun event. RSVP for the event on Facebook and invite your friends.
October 1, 2010 – Banned Book Reading
Woodland Pattern Book Center, 720 E. Locust St., 6:30 p.m. reception, 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. program, Milwaukee
Join the ACLU of Wisconsin Foundation, Woodland Pattern Book Center, the Wisconsin Center for the Book and Art Night Books for a reading of challenged or banned works of art. Readers will be announced soon. To co-sponsor the event or to donate funds to help provide food and beverages, contact liberty@aclu-wi.org or call 414-272-4032 x 11. To see pictures of last year’s event, visit our blog.
Friday, August 20, 2010
ACLU of WI Will Support State’s Domestic Partner Registry: Same-sex Couples Will Show Registry is Not Marriage
The ACLU of Wisconsin will continue its work to ensure that same-sex couples maintain the basic protections provided in the state’s new domestic partnership registry.
“We expected a challenge to the registry in a lower court,” said Chris Ahmuty, ACLU of Wisconsin’s executive director. “We’re fully prepared to help defend the state’s registry so that same-sex couples in Wisconsin can have access to the basic, although limited, legal rights their families need.”
The ACLU of Wisconsin supported the defense of the state’s domestic partnership registry in 2009 when an earlier challenge was filed by Wisconsin Family Action in the state Supreme Court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court dismissed the complaint in November 2009. This week Wisconsin Family Action filed a new challenge in the Dane County court which could allow both sides to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“While the Wisconsin Family Action and the Alliance Defense Fund will attempt to compare the domestic partnership registry to the legal definition of marriage,” Ahmuty continued, “same-sex couples will seek to demonstrate a factual record of how the protections offered by the registry are quite limited and in no way violate the marriage ban.”
For more of our recent work on LGBT rights, visit the issues section of our website. Read more about the latest challenge to same-sex families in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and the Wisconsin State Journal. The Journal Sentinel article has a lively comments section, so feel free to weigh in with your support for LGBT equality.
“We expected a challenge to the registry in a lower court,” said Chris Ahmuty, ACLU of Wisconsin’s executive director. “We’re fully prepared to help defend the state’s registry so that same-sex couples in Wisconsin can have access to the basic, although limited, legal rights their families need.”
The ACLU of Wisconsin supported the defense of the state’s domestic partnership registry in 2009 when an earlier challenge was filed by Wisconsin Family Action in the state Supreme Court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court dismissed the complaint in November 2009. This week Wisconsin Family Action filed a new challenge in the Dane County court which could allow both sides to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“While the Wisconsin Family Action and the Alliance Defense Fund will attempt to compare the domestic partnership registry to the legal definition of marriage,” Ahmuty continued, “same-sex couples will seek to demonstrate a factual record of how the protections offered by the registry are quite limited and in no way violate the marriage ban.”
For more of our recent work on LGBT rights, visit the issues section of our website. Read more about the latest challenge to same-sex families in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and the Wisconsin State Journal. The Journal Sentinel article has a lively comments section, so feel free to weigh in with your support for LGBT equality.
Monday, July 26, 2010
On Tuesday, Let’s Hope ‘Forward’ — Influences the National Organization for Marriage
Posted in the op-ed section of the Capitol Times.
The National Organization for Marriage tour bus will stop by our Capitol building on Tuesday at noon to bring its message to the residents of Dane County that only different-sex couples are families. Local residents who support marriage for all loving, committed couples will hold a counterdemonstration where they will likely outnumber the NOM folks. The Madison office of the ACLU of Wisconsin will send volunteer legal observers to witness the protest and counterdemonstration as people on both sides of the marriage debate flex their free speech rights. We love it.
The ACLU of Wisconsin welcomes the National Organization for Marriage bus tour to rally on our Capitol steps. And not just because everyone has the right to free speech. We welcome the NOM because we are for marriage too. Like free speech, everyone should have the right to marry. And the ACLU of Wisconsin continues to work to advance the fair treatment of same-sex couples.
Until the time when voters can successfully repeal the discriminatory constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying, there are more real families that need equal protection under law today. Just over a year ago, the state Legislature created a domestic partner registry and benefits for same-sex partners of state employees. But these steps fall far short of the necessary legal protections provided to the families of married couples. National and local foes of the domestic registry want to challenge it.
Among the opponents, the National Organization for Marriage wants to convince voters of the need to restrict the freedom and liberty of loving, committed couples to have their marriages recognized by law. This group should have a hard time proving that heterosexual marriages are threatened by recognizing other relationships. Fortunately most Madisonians know exactly how much stronger our community is because of the diverse families who live here. And that is the kind of freedom we all can be proud of.
In the long run, people who work to restrict freedom and liberty will fail. The history of our country and our Constitution is a story of evolution, progress and an expansion of rights for individual freedom. Hopefully, when the National Organization for Marriage bus tour stops at the Capitol near a statue emblazoned with our state motto “Forward,” they will be welcomed as freedom of speech dictates, and then they will take the statue’s advice.
Please visit the op-ed webpage and log in to leave your comments on why NOM is wrong about same-sex marriage.
The National Organization for Marriage tour bus will stop by our Capitol building on Tuesday at noon to bring its message to the residents of Dane County that only different-sex couples are families. Local residents who support marriage for all loving, committed couples will hold a counterdemonstration where they will likely outnumber the NOM folks. The Madison office of the ACLU of Wisconsin will send volunteer legal observers to witness the protest and counterdemonstration as people on both sides of the marriage debate flex their free speech rights. We love it.
The ACLU of Wisconsin welcomes the National Organization for Marriage bus tour to rally on our Capitol steps. And not just because everyone has the right to free speech. We welcome the NOM because we are for marriage too. Like free speech, everyone should have the right to marry. And the ACLU of Wisconsin continues to work to advance the fair treatment of same-sex couples.
Until the time when voters can successfully repeal the discriminatory constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying, there are more real families that need equal protection under law today. Just over a year ago, the state Legislature created a domestic partner registry and benefits for same-sex partners of state employees. But these steps fall far short of the necessary legal protections provided to the families of married couples. National and local foes of the domestic registry want to challenge it.
Among the opponents, the National Organization for Marriage wants to convince voters of the need to restrict the freedom and liberty of loving, committed couples to have their marriages recognized by law. This group should have a hard time proving that heterosexual marriages are threatened by recognizing other relationships. Fortunately most Madisonians know exactly how much stronger our community is because of the diverse families who live here. And that is the kind of freedom we all can be proud of.
In the long run, people who work to restrict freedom and liberty will fail. The history of our country and our Constitution is a story of evolution, progress and an expansion of rights for individual freedom. Hopefully, when the National Organization for Marriage bus tour stops at the Capitol near a statue emblazoned with our state motto “Forward,” they will be welcomed as freedom of speech dictates, and then they will take the statue’s advice.
Please visit the op-ed webpage and log in to leave your comments on why NOM is wrong about same-sex marriage.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Police Censorship of Gay-Themed Play Lawsuit Settled: City Pays MKE Gay Arts Center and Clarifies Theater License Requirements
On July 14th, 2010, the Milwaukee Gay Arts Center (MGAC) received a check for $20,000 from the City of Milwaukee in settlement of a federal lawsuit filed on its behalf by the ACLU of Wisconsin. The suit alleged that the City violated the First Amendment by shutting down “Naked Boys Singing,” a musical play with gay themes that has been produced around the country, after receiving complaints from a citizen who objected to its content.
Paul Masterson, the Executive Director of the Milwaukee Gay Arts Center, said the settlement sends a message that the government should not interfere lightly with theatrical works, including works that express and celebrate gay identity. “Good theater sometimes challenges convention,” Masterson said. “The police should not shut down a play because some people find it offensive.”
City officials told MGAC representatives in August of 2005 that it could not stage the play because the Center had not obtained a theater license required by a local ordinance. The ordinance requires that the Common Council approve theater license applications, but the Common Council was not meeting until long after “Naked Boys Singing” was scheduled to run.
After the play was shut down, the City determined that, because the Milwaukee Gay Arts Center was a non-profit organization, it was exempt from the license requirement. After the dispute over “Naked Boys Singing” emerged, the City changed its theater licensing forms to make clear that non-profits were not required to get a theater license. However, the city ordinance still requires for-profit theaters to obtain a license and puts no time limit on when the Common Council must decide on the license application.
“Requiring any theater to get a license before putting on a play comes dangerously close to the kind of ‘prior restraint’ on speech the First Amendment was designed to prohibit,” said ACLU of Wisconsin Legal Director Larry Dupuis. “We are pleased that the City has clarified the process so that non-profits will know they are not required to get a license. However, we continue to believe that the City should amend its ordinance to limit the time the City has to issue any theater license. It’s too easy for the authorities to just delay giving the permit to performances they don’t like.”
The Milwaukee Gay Arts Center was represented in the case by cooperating counsel Steve Porter and Jeff Scott Olson of Madison, Wisconsin, and ACLU of Wisconsin legal director Larry Dupuis.
The story has had news mentions on WCCO CBS in the Twin Cities and western Wisconsin, The Onion's Milwaukee AV Club, WBAY ABC-2 in Green Bay, WTAQ 97.5 and 1360 AM News Talk, as well as on Playbill.com, Milwaukee Broadwayworld.com, and Our Lives magazine in Madison.
Paul Masterson, the Executive Director of the Milwaukee Gay Arts Center, said the settlement sends a message that the government should not interfere lightly with theatrical works, including works that express and celebrate gay identity. “Good theater sometimes challenges convention,” Masterson said. “The police should not shut down a play because some people find it offensive.”
City officials told MGAC representatives in August of 2005 that it could not stage the play because the Center had not obtained a theater license required by a local ordinance. The ordinance requires that the Common Council approve theater license applications, but the Common Council was not meeting until long after “Naked Boys Singing” was scheduled to run.
After the play was shut down, the City determined that, because the Milwaukee Gay Arts Center was a non-profit organization, it was exempt from the license requirement. After the dispute over “Naked Boys Singing” emerged, the City changed its theater licensing forms to make clear that non-profits were not required to get a theater license. However, the city ordinance still requires for-profit theaters to obtain a license and puts no time limit on when the Common Council must decide on the license application.
“Requiring any theater to get a license before putting on a play comes dangerously close to the kind of ‘prior restraint’ on speech the First Amendment was designed to prohibit,” said ACLU of Wisconsin Legal Director Larry Dupuis. “We are pleased that the City has clarified the process so that non-profits will know they are not required to get a license. However, we continue to believe that the City should amend its ordinance to limit the time the City has to issue any theater license. It’s too easy for the authorities to just delay giving the permit to performances they don’t like.”
The Milwaukee Gay Arts Center was represented in the case by cooperating counsel Steve Porter and Jeff Scott Olson of Madison, Wisconsin, and ACLU of Wisconsin legal director Larry Dupuis.
The story has had news mentions on WCCO CBS in the Twin Cities and western Wisconsin, The Onion's Milwaukee AV Club, WBAY ABC-2 in Green Bay, WTAQ 97.5 and 1360 AM News Talk, as well as on Playbill.com, Milwaukee Broadwayworld.com, and Our Lives magazine in Madison.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Decision on Marriage Amendment Referendum: ACLU of Wisconsin Responds
Today, Christopher Ahmuty, the Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin issued the following statement in response to the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision affirming the lower court's ruling that the marriage amendment adopted by Wisconsin's voters in 2006 did not violate the separate amendment rule of the Wisconsin Constitution. This constitutional rule requires that voters must be able to vote separately on separate constitutional amendments.
Ahmuty said, "the Court wisely limited its analysis of the marriage amendment's two clauses, without trying to decide 'what legal statuses identical or substantially similar to marriage are prohibited by this [the second] clause…' The ACLU maintains that the marriage amendment's second clause only prohibits 'marriage by another name' which confers all the benefits, protections, and responsibilities of civil marriages. The Court's decision means the fight for recognition of same sex domestic relationships will continue to advance, a fight in which the ACLU will continue to participate vigorously.
"The ACLU of Wisconsin joined Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and Fair Wisconsin in filing an amicus brief in McConkey v. Van Hollen."
For more of our recent work on LGBT rights, visit the issues section of our website.
Ahmuty said, "the Court wisely limited its analysis of the marriage amendment's two clauses, without trying to decide 'what legal statuses identical or substantially similar to marriage are prohibited by this [the second] clause…' The ACLU maintains that the marriage amendment's second clause only prohibits 'marriage by another name' which confers all the benefits, protections, and responsibilities of civil marriages. The Court's decision means the fight for recognition of same sex domestic relationships will continue to advance, a fight in which the ACLU will continue to participate vigorously.
"The ACLU of Wisconsin joined Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and Fair Wisconsin in filing an amicus brief in McConkey v. Van Hollen."
For more of our recent work on LGBT rights, visit the issues section of our website.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Victory! Federal Court Says Transgender People Allowed Medical Treatment in Prison
On Wednesday, March 31, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin struck down a law that barred transgender people from receiving medical care while they are incarcerated. The American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal challenged the law in January 2006 on behalf of transgender prisoners, some of whom had been receiving hormones in Wisconsin prisons for years prior to the passage of the law.
"This decision recognizes that many transgender prisoners require individualized medical treatment. While the court’s ruling does not require any particular treatment, it does mean that doctors are the ones who make these medical decisions," said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s LGBT Project. "The court’s decision is just common sense."
Overriding concerns raised by of the Department of Corrections medical personnel, the Wisconsin legislature passed a law, effective in January 2006, that prohibited prison doctors from deciding the best course of treatment for transgender people by barring them from prescribing any type of hormone therapy or sex reassignment surgery for transgender people in state custody.
"The court understood that medical treatment is critical for transgender people and that medical decisions should be made by doctors not legislators," said Dru Levasseur, Lambda Legal’s Transgender Rights attorney. "The state cannot decide to withhold treatment from people because they disapprove of their gender identity or medical needs: it’s unconstitutional."
The lawsuit charged that it is a violation of the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection as well as the guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment to bar transgender inmates from access to individualized medical care. The legal groups based their challenge on federal case law that establishes that health care providers must determine proper treatment for all prison inmates.
The court ruled that the statute’s ban on medical care constitutes deliberate indifference to the plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment inasmuch as enforcement of the statute results in the denial of hormone therapy without regard for the individual medical needs of inmates and the medical judgment of their health care providers.
According to the ACLU and Lambda Legal, Wisconsin is the only state in the country to have enacted a law denying transgender people access to medical care while in state custody. The legal team includes John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project; Larry Dupuis, Legal Director of the ACLU of Wisconsin; Cole Thaler and Levasseur, former and current Transgender Rights Project attorneys at Lambda Legal and cooperating attorney Erik Guenther of Hurley, Burish & Stanton, S.C.
Find out more about the Sundstrom v. Frank case on-line, on the Lambda Legal website or read the judge's order.
The news did get some media attention in Wisconsin. There was an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article and on WISN-ABC 12. The news will likely fuel lots of transphobic sentiments like what you'd find in the Dakota Voice blog (noteworthy: bloggers are pointing out how judges are either elected or appointed by elected officials and that elections matter).
But despite such backlash, things are changing for the trans community. For example, this year, the Obama Administration has added transgender/gender identity to the list of classes of people against whom discrimination in federal employment is prohibited. Check out this page on the ACLU website that answers lots of questions about the rights of transgender people and the law. It covers discrimination law, family law, criminal hate crimes and more.
"This decision recognizes that many transgender prisoners require individualized medical treatment. While the court’s ruling does not require any particular treatment, it does mean that doctors are the ones who make these medical decisions," said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s LGBT Project. "The court’s decision is just common sense."
Overriding concerns raised by of the Department of Corrections medical personnel, the Wisconsin legislature passed a law, effective in January 2006, that prohibited prison doctors from deciding the best course of treatment for transgender people by barring them from prescribing any type of hormone therapy or sex reassignment surgery for transgender people in state custody.
"The court understood that medical treatment is critical for transgender people and that medical decisions should be made by doctors not legislators," said Dru Levasseur, Lambda Legal’s Transgender Rights attorney. "The state cannot decide to withhold treatment from people because they disapprove of their gender identity or medical needs: it’s unconstitutional."
The lawsuit charged that it is a violation of the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection as well as the guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment to bar transgender inmates from access to individualized medical care. The legal groups based their challenge on federal case law that establishes that health care providers must determine proper treatment for all prison inmates.
The court ruled that the statute’s ban on medical care constitutes deliberate indifference to the plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment inasmuch as enforcement of the statute results in the denial of hormone therapy without regard for the individual medical needs of inmates and the medical judgment of their health care providers.
According to the ACLU and Lambda Legal, Wisconsin is the only state in the country to have enacted a law denying transgender people access to medical care while in state custody. The legal team includes John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project; Larry Dupuis, Legal Director of the ACLU of Wisconsin; Cole Thaler and Levasseur, former and current Transgender Rights Project attorneys at Lambda Legal and cooperating attorney Erik Guenther of Hurley, Burish & Stanton, S.C.
Find out more about the Sundstrom v. Frank case on-line, on the Lambda Legal website or read the judge's order.
The news did get some media attention in Wisconsin. There was an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article and on WISN-ABC 12. The news will likely fuel lots of transphobic sentiments like what you'd find in the Dakota Voice blog (noteworthy: bloggers are pointing out how judges are either elected or appointed by elected officials and that elections matter).
But despite such backlash, things are changing for the trans community. For example, this year, the Obama Administration has added transgender/gender identity to the list of classes of people against whom discrimination in federal employment is prohibited. Check out this page on the ACLU website that answers lots of questions about the rights of transgender people and the law. It covers discrimination law, family law, criminal hate crimes and more.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Thumbs Up to Carthage College for Allowing Student Protest and Dialogue
This evening on the campus of Carthage College in Kenosha, a student-led rally is being held to protest Saturday’s InterVarsity Christian Fellowship’s keynote speaker who is allegedly opposed to homosexuals and shares an anti-gay message.
Although Carthage College is a private religious institution, students encouraged the school to disinvite the speaker. The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin hopes the school will encourage future speakers with differing ideas to expand the dialogue at the school in the same way they are allowing the InterVarsity program to continue.
“Since the biology professor at Fresno City College incorporated anti-homosexual pseudoscience in his classes,” said UW-Parkside sophomore Maggie Piery, an ACLU Student Alliance member, “it seems like some new sick trend to have anti-gay speakers at centers of higher education. I’m glad I attend a public institution where there is a strong commitment to both diverse perspectives and also supporting a diverse student body including LGBT students.”
Earlier this afternoon the Vice President of Enrollment and Student Affairs along with other school officials arranged for space to be provided for a simultaneous speak-out for students with opposing viewpoints to discuss tomorrow’s controversy. The ACLU of Wisconsin applauds this effort by the school to accommodate and encourage more free speech, student debate and an open and fair exchange of ideas.
Although Carthage College is a private religious institution, students encouraged the school to disinvite the speaker. The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin hopes the school will encourage future speakers with differing ideas to expand the dialogue at the school in the same way they are allowing the InterVarsity program to continue.
“Since the biology professor at Fresno City College incorporated anti-homosexual pseudoscience in his classes,” said UW-Parkside sophomore Maggie Piery, an ACLU Student Alliance member, “it seems like some new sick trend to have anti-gay speakers at centers of higher education. I’m glad I attend a public institution where there is a strong commitment to both diverse perspectives and also supporting a diverse student body including LGBT students.”
Earlier this afternoon the Vice President of Enrollment and Student Affairs along with other school officials arranged for space to be provided for a simultaneous speak-out for students with opposing viewpoints to discuss tomorrow’s controversy. The ACLU of Wisconsin applauds this effort by the school to accommodate and encourage more free speech, student debate and an open and fair exchange of ideas.
News roundup: Grothman not a fan of sex ed, medical marijuana in Berlin (WI), spying on abortion activists and more...
Here is some news you might have missed..
We got coverage on Milwaukee's TMJ4 on the ACLU's opposition to an effort by lawmakers to bar public disclosure of 911 calls. "The public deserves to get all the information with very limited exceptions," said Christopher Ahmuty of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin. "Those exceptions should be done on the basis of a balancing test that's in the current law now."
Senator Glenn Grothman was a bit hit in the blogosphere when he said in a Cap Times interview that he didn't approve of the comprehensive sex ed bill that's headed to the Governor's desk on Wednesday. It might have been his comments about how teasing feminine boys was normal at his high school that even got the attention of Perez Hilton. Note to all Wisconsin state legislators: bullying or discriminating against gay youth is NOT okay. (But it is okay to give the ACLU a shout out in Glee!)
Did you see the coverage of the medical marijuana advocacy event in Berlin, WI? Central Wisconsin folks asked if their medicine was legal yet. Another lobby day is scheduled at the Capitol on Wednesday. Contact IMMLY for details.
Madison city council alders are considering a parental responsibility law. The proposal is being pushed by the same folks who tried to keep kids inside earlier at last year's curfew ordinance that the ACLU of Wisconsin helped to defeat. If you are a single mom who works three jobs to scrape by and your youngster gets a ticket for disorderly conduct at the bus transfer point, will you have time to go to court to deal with the fine in your name?
Speaking of Madisonians with limited income, we've been observing the housing issue around Shorewood Hills and the proposal to replace the nearly vacant Pyare Square building. Some residents of the affluent neighborhood complained about a large apartment complex that housed limited-income families, but developers tried to quell their fears by making the complex for seniors. Finally the whole project was scrapped due to the height of the building design. Whenever there are concerns about building affordable housing, our ears prick up mostly because of fights like what happened in South Milwaukee with the Lake Point Apartments.
Remember the dust up over anti-Hmong comments by a UW law professor? The dust hasn't completely settled. Madison Hmong community leader is still asking questions about the Hmong studies program that was promised to be added to the university offerings.
The news broke that Homeland Security was working with Middleton police last year to spy on anti-abortion activists who were planning a big rally that would no doubt overwhelm the police resources. The news said that DHS investigated both prochoice and anti-abortion activists, but we haven't heard from prochoicers about alleged probes. We're a prochoice organization, but DHS can't spy on activists. Period. Only when there is probable cause (i.e. evidence that's more than a hunch that a crime will be committed) can an investigation legally be started. The feds admitted wrongly investigating the activists, but Middleton police aren't turning over records and feds say they deleted copies of the assessment. Sorry Michele Malkin, we do care when government spies on First Amendment protected activity.
The ACLU's Bill of Rights Celebration is tomorrow! Twitter fan? @ACLUofWisconsin and @ACLUMadison will be live tweeting at the #BORC event! Follow us to hear more from blogger journalist @anamariecox!
We got coverage on Milwaukee's TMJ4 on the ACLU's opposition to an effort by lawmakers to bar public disclosure of 911 calls. "The public deserves to get all the information with very limited exceptions," said Christopher Ahmuty of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin. "Those exceptions should be done on the basis of a balancing test that's in the current law now."
Senator Glenn Grothman was a bit hit in the blogosphere when he said in a Cap Times interview that he didn't approve of the comprehensive sex ed bill that's headed to the Governor's desk on Wednesday. It might have been his comments about how teasing feminine boys was normal at his high school that even got the attention of Perez Hilton. Note to all Wisconsin state legislators: bullying or discriminating against gay youth is NOT okay. (But it is okay to give the ACLU a shout out in Glee!)
Did you see the coverage of the medical marijuana advocacy event in Berlin, WI? Central Wisconsin folks asked if their medicine was legal yet. Another lobby day is scheduled at the Capitol on Wednesday. Contact IMMLY for details.
Madison city council alders are considering a parental responsibility law. The proposal is being pushed by the same folks who tried to keep kids inside earlier at last year's curfew ordinance that the ACLU of Wisconsin helped to defeat. If you are a single mom who works three jobs to scrape by and your youngster gets a ticket for disorderly conduct at the bus transfer point, will you have time to go to court to deal with the fine in your name?
Speaking of Madisonians with limited income, we've been observing the housing issue around Shorewood Hills and the proposal to replace the nearly vacant Pyare Square building. Some residents of the affluent neighborhood complained about a large apartment complex that housed limited-income families, but developers tried to quell their fears by making the complex for seniors. Finally the whole project was scrapped due to the height of the building design. Whenever there are concerns about building affordable housing, our ears prick up mostly because of fights like what happened in South Milwaukee with the Lake Point Apartments.
Remember the dust up over anti-Hmong comments by a UW law professor? The dust hasn't completely settled. Madison Hmong community leader is still asking questions about the Hmong studies program that was promised to be added to the university offerings.
The news broke that Homeland Security was working with Middleton police last year to spy on anti-abortion activists who were planning a big rally that would no doubt overwhelm the police resources. The news said that DHS investigated both prochoice and anti-abortion activists, but we haven't heard from prochoicers about alleged probes. We're a prochoice organization, but DHS can't spy on activists. Period. Only when there is probable cause (i.e. evidence that's more than a hunch that a crime will be committed) can an investigation legally be started. The feds admitted wrongly investigating the activists, but Middleton police aren't turning over records and feds say they deleted copies of the assessment. Sorry Michele Malkin, we do care when government spies on First Amendment protected activity.
The ACLU's Bill of Rights Celebration is tomorrow! Twitter fan? @ACLUofWisconsin and @ACLUMadison will be live tweeting at the #BORC event! Follow us to hear more from blogger journalist @anamariecox!
Monday, February 15, 2010
Saturday: ACLU Bill of Rights Celebration in Milwaukee, Ana Marie Cox, Civil LIberties Awards and More
On Saturday, February 20, 2010 the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin members and supporters will exercise their own freedom of assembly at the annual Bill of Rights Celebration.
This year’s event will feature pioneering political journalist and founder of the Wonkette Blog Ana Marie Cox. The “Wonkette Emeritus” continues to shape the future of journalism across media, at her personal blog and on Twitter where she has more than 1.5 million followers. Cox is a frequent guest on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show and broke new ground with live blogs of the State of the Union for GQ Magazine and the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” hearings for The Awl.
This ACLU of Wisconsin event will honor the work of several outstanding organizations and compatriots in the fight to protect our freedoms.
The Eunice Z. Edgar Lifetime Achievement Award will be presented to The Progressive Magazine in recognition of more than a century of incisive journalism. The Progressive was founded in 1909 by beloved Wisconsin Senator and civil libertarian Robert La Follette and is a voice for freedom. Projects like “McCarthyism Watch” exemplify the role of the press as a check on the actions of government and a defender of civil liberties and civil rights.
The William Gorham Rice Civil Libertarians of the Year Award will honor the West Bend Activists for Free Speech who stood up to book burners and censorship in their community.
Jack and Lucy Rosenberg Youth Civil Libertarian of the Year Award acknowledges the work and legacy of Camp Everytown for producing a generation of young Wisconsin leaders. Each summer high-school age participants receive intensive leadership training to help them become outspoken advocates against discrimination of every kind.
Tickets are still available. Go to our website for more information on the event and to order tickets online or contact Marion by email or phone 414-272-4032 extension 18.
Bonus:
You might also want to check out the latest issue of the Milwaukee Gazette (PDF), a sponsor of the Bill of Rights Celebration. You can see the fancy ad, and also read the article the magazine did on the important subject of homeless LGBT youth and the Cream City Foundation study which found that 23% of homeless young people in Milwaukee are sexual minority youth.
This year’s event will feature pioneering political journalist and founder of the Wonkette Blog Ana Marie Cox. The “Wonkette Emeritus” continues to shape the future of journalism across media, at her personal blog and on Twitter where she has more than 1.5 million followers. Cox is a frequent guest on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show and broke new ground with live blogs of the State of the Union for GQ Magazine and the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” hearings for The Awl.
This ACLU of Wisconsin event will honor the work of several outstanding organizations and compatriots in the fight to protect our freedoms.
The Eunice Z. Edgar Lifetime Achievement Award will be presented to The Progressive Magazine in recognition of more than a century of incisive journalism. The Progressive was founded in 1909 by beloved Wisconsin Senator and civil libertarian Robert La Follette and is a voice for freedom. Projects like “McCarthyism Watch” exemplify the role of the press as a check on the actions of government and a defender of civil liberties and civil rights.
The William Gorham Rice Civil Libertarians of the Year Award will honor the West Bend Activists for Free Speech who stood up to book burners and censorship in their community.
Jack and Lucy Rosenberg Youth Civil Libertarian of the Year Award acknowledges the work and legacy of Camp Everytown for producing a generation of young Wisconsin leaders. Each summer high-school age participants receive intensive leadership training to help them become outspoken advocates against discrimination of every kind.
Tickets are still available. Go to our website for more information on the event and to order tickets online or contact Marion by email or phone 414-272-4032 extension 18.
Bonus:
You might also want to check out the latest issue of the Milwaukee Gazette (PDF), a sponsor of the Bill of Rights Celebration. You can see the fancy ad, and also read the article the magazine did on the important subject of homeless LGBT youth and the Cream City Foundation study which found that 23% of homeless young people in Milwaukee are sexual minority youth.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Victory! Challenge to Domestic Partner Registry Thrown Out by State Supreme Court
Committed Couples Can Continue To Enjoy Limited Protections Offered By Registry
On Wednesday, November 4 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union celebrated a decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court to dismiss a challenge to the state’s recently-enacted domestic partnership registry. The Court also rejected a request from board members of Wisconsin Family Action that the registry be declared unconstitutional and put indefinitely on hold. The ACLU represents five same-sex couples who asked to be allowed to participate in the case.
“The registry certainly doesn’t offer anywhere close to the protections that marriage would, but we’re grateful that the couples we represented can at least hang onto the limited legal protections it gives them, such as the ability to visit each other in the hospital,” said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project.
Board members of Wisconsin Family Action had asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex couples from marriage. The dismissal of the case by the Wisconsin Supreme Court means that these petitioners may not begin their case in the Wisconsin Supreme Court but may re-file their case in a circuit court (a lower court), where both sides will be able to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“The Wisconsin Supreme Court did the right thing rejecting this premature and ill-defined challenge. If the petitioners want to deprive thousands of families of some very basic protections, they should not be allowed to short-circuit the legal process of proving their case to a trial judge,” said Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “We’re certain that if we end up having to deal with these arguments in a trial, we’ll be able to show how the limited protections offered by the domestic partnership registry in no way violate the marriage ban.”
The five couples represented by the ACLU had also asked the court to let them join the lawsuit so that they could help defend the new domestic partnership registry. That motion was denied as moot, since the lawsuit was dismissed. Fair Wisconsin, an LGBT advocacy organization whose members include same-sex couples who have registered as domestic partners under the new law, also sought to intervene in the lawsuit to help defend the law.
In addition to Dupuis and Knight, the legal team representing the couples includes Linda Hansen, David Froiland, Jason Plowman, Daniel Manna and David Goroff of Foley & Lardner, LLP.
Additional information about the ACLU’s motion, including bios and photographs of the couples, the legal documents filed and a fact sheet containing some of the comments made by the anti-gay activists seeking to strike the law, is available online.
Press coverage of the decision thus far has been limited, but there was coverage in the UW Badger Herald and a story on this morning's Wisconsin Public Radio headlines.
On Wednesday, November 4 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union celebrated a decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court to dismiss a challenge to the state’s recently-enacted domestic partnership registry. The Court also rejected a request from board members of Wisconsin Family Action that the registry be declared unconstitutional and put indefinitely on hold. The ACLU represents five same-sex couples who asked to be allowed to participate in the case.
“The registry certainly doesn’t offer anywhere close to the protections that marriage would, but we’re grateful that the couples we represented can at least hang onto the limited legal protections it gives them, such as the ability to visit each other in the hospital,” said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project.
Board members of Wisconsin Family Action had asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex couples from marriage. The dismissal of the case by the Wisconsin Supreme Court means that these petitioners may not begin their case in the Wisconsin Supreme Court but may re-file their case in a circuit court (a lower court), where both sides will be able to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“The Wisconsin Supreme Court did the right thing rejecting this premature and ill-defined challenge. If the petitioners want to deprive thousands of families of some very basic protections, they should not be allowed to short-circuit the legal process of proving their case to a trial judge,” said Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “We’re certain that if we end up having to deal with these arguments in a trial, we’ll be able to show how the limited protections offered by the domestic partnership registry in no way violate the marriage ban.”
The five couples represented by the ACLU had also asked the court to let them join the lawsuit so that they could help defend the new domestic partnership registry. That motion was denied as moot, since the lawsuit was dismissed. Fair Wisconsin, an LGBT advocacy organization whose members include same-sex couples who have registered as domestic partners under the new law, also sought to intervene in the lawsuit to help defend the law.
In addition to Dupuis and Knight, the legal team representing the couples includes Linda Hansen, David Froiland, Jason Plowman, Daniel Manna and David Goroff of Foley & Lardner, LLP.
Additional information about the ACLU’s motion, including bios and photographs of the couples, the legal documents filed and a fact sheet containing some of the comments made by the anti-gay activists seeking to strike the law, is available online.
Press coverage of the decision thus far has been limited, but there was coverage in the UW Badger Herald and a story on this morning's Wisconsin Public Radio headlines.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Domestic Partners Seek To Intervene In Lawsuit Challenging Wisconsin’s Domestic Partner Law
The ACLU Urges Wisconsin Supreme Court To Send Case To Trial Court So That Those Most Affected By The Lawsuit Can Be Heard
On September 22, 2009, The American Civil Liberties Union filed a motion before the Wisconsin Supreme Court on behalf of five same-sex couples asking that they be allowed to participate in a lawsuit that will decide whether the state’s newly enacted domestic partner law violates Wisconsin’s anti-gay marriage amendment.
Anti-gay activists have asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the marriage amendment. The couples also ask the Court to reject the petition and send the case to a trial court so that evidence can be presented to show that the domestic partner law does not violate the anti-gay marriage amendment that passed in 2006.
“While the domestic partner law falls far short of marriage, we were grateful when it passed that we would no longer have to worry about being able to visit each other in the hospital,” said Jayne Dunnum who, along with her partner of 17 years, Robin Timm, registered to become domestic partners when the law went into effect this summer. “But with this lawsuit those fears are back, and we’d like the opportunity to explain to the courts how this affects us.”
According to the motion filed by the ACLU, the five same-sex couples meet all the legal requirements for becoming a party to the litigation and would suffer harm if the court overturns the domestic partner law.
“We’re hopeful that the Wisconsin Supreme Court will recognize that lesbian and gay couples have the most at stake in this lawsuit and deserve their day in court,” said Larry Dupuis, Legal Director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “Only same-sex couples can describe what it’s like to fear not being able to visit a partner in the hospital or being left with nothing when a partner dies without a will. And only same-sex couples can explain what it means to be shut out of marriage and have to accept a poorly understood, second-class status as domestic partners with 43 legal protections versus more than 200 that come with marriage.”
The anti-gay activists who are seeking to take away the legal protections for registered domestic partners have claimed that they need a speedy resolution and are entitled to go directly to the Wisconsin Supreme Court because the modest legal protections granted to same-sex couples through the law somehow affect the marriages of straight couples. Rather incredulously, they also claim that it would be in the best interest of lesbian and gay couples to have a speedy resolution even though they are asking the court to strip domestic partners of all legal protections.
According to the ACLU, there are important factual issues in the case, such as the many ways in which domestic partnership differs from marriage, that call for the kind of testimony that same-sex couples can provide to the Court. To consider this important evidence, the Supreme Court should refuse to accept this case directly but instead allow a circuit court to develop the factual record.
During the political campaign for the anti-gay marriage amendment that is the basis for this lawsuit, these same anti-gay activists told the voters that domestic partner benefits would not be affected by the amendment and legislators said that the state would be allowed to pass a law giving same-sex couples some legal protections.
“The anti-gay activists misled the voters into passing the amendment by saying that it would not affect the rights of domestic partners. Then they tried to prevent the legislature from providing modest legal protections for same-sex couples. And soon after the bill went into effect, they brought a lawsuit to take those protections away, based on the amendment that they said would not affect such rights” said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project. “It’s incredible the lengths they will go to deny committed couples basic protections for their families.”
The same-sex couples asking to be allowed into the lawsuit include:
Jayne Dunnum and Robin Timm from Plattsville, WI, have been together for 17 years. After Timm was injured on their farm and had to be rushed to the emergency room, they worry about being able to visit each other in the hospital and are hoping the domestic partner law will put an end to these worries.
Carol Schumacher and Virginia Wolf from Eau Claire, WI, have been together for 34 years. As they enter their senior years, the domestic partner law would ease their worries about being shut out of conversations about each other’s medical care and other end-of-life decisions and guarantee that they are not barred from sharing a room if they end up in a nursing home.
Wendy and Mary Woodruff from Milwaukee, WI, have been together for 12 years. As a minister for the Metropolitan Community Church, Rev. Wendy Woodruff has had to console a congregant who lost everything, including her home and furniture, when her partner was killed and the partner’s relatives claimed their entire estate. They fear the same thing would happen to them without the inheritance protections of the domestic partner law.
Judith Trampf and Katy Heyning from Madison, WI, celebrated their 20th Anniversary this summer. A few years back, Heyning had a seizure that left her unable to drive for six months. Unable to take family leave, Trampf had to use her vacation time to drive Katy to doctor’s appointments and to and from work. Under the domestic partner law, the couple would finally gain access to family leave protection.
Diane Schermann and Missy Collins from Eau Claire, WI, have known each other for 10 years and have been a couple for five. The couple is raising seven children, including Diane’s two children from a previous marriage, a new baby that Missy gave birth to through in vitro fertilization and four foster children, two of which are relatives of Collins. Like many couples their age, the couple has put off making wills because of the expense. The domestic partner law would guarantee that at least half of their joint property automatically passes to each other.
Lambda Legal also filed papers today to intervene in the Appling v. Doyle case on behalf of Fair Wisconsin, the statewide equality organization, and its members. Lambda Legal, like the ACLU, says domestic partnerships and marriages are not "substantially similar."
Linda Hansen, David Froiland, Jason Plowman, Daniel Manna and David Goroff of Foley & Lardner, LLP are assisting ACLU attorneys Dupuis and Knight in representing the couples. Additional information about the ACLU’s motion, including bios and photographs of the couples and the legal documents filed today are available online.
On September 22, 2009, The American Civil Liberties Union filed a motion before the Wisconsin Supreme Court on behalf of five same-sex couples asking that they be allowed to participate in a lawsuit that will decide whether the state’s newly enacted domestic partner law violates Wisconsin’s anti-gay marriage amendment.
Anti-gay activists have asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the marriage amendment. The couples also ask the Court to reject the petition and send the case to a trial court so that evidence can be presented to show that the domestic partner law does not violate the anti-gay marriage amendment that passed in 2006.
“While the domestic partner law falls far short of marriage, we were grateful when it passed that we would no longer have to worry about being able to visit each other in the hospital,” said Jayne Dunnum who, along with her partner of 17 years, Robin Timm, registered to become domestic partners when the law went into effect this summer. “But with this lawsuit those fears are back, and we’d like the opportunity to explain to the courts how this affects us.”
According to the motion filed by the ACLU, the five same-sex couples meet all the legal requirements for becoming a party to the litigation and would suffer harm if the court overturns the domestic partner law.
“We’re hopeful that the Wisconsin Supreme Court will recognize that lesbian and gay couples have the most at stake in this lawsuit and deserve their day in court,” said Larry Dupuis, Legal Director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “Only same-sex couples can describe what it’s like to fear not being able to visit a partner in the hospital or being left with nothing when a partner dies without a will. And only same-sex couples can explain what it means to be shut out of marriage and have to accept a poorly understood, second-class status as domestic partners with 43 legal protections versus more than 200 that come with marriage.”
The anti-gay activists who are seeking to take away the legal protections for registered domestic partners have claimed that they need a speedy resolution and are entitled to go directly to the Wisconsin Supreme Court because the modest legal protections granted to same-sex couples through the law somehow affect the marriages of straight couples. Rather incredulously, they also claim that it would be in the best interest of lesbian and gay couples to have a speedy resolution even though they are asking the court to strip domestic partners of all legal protections.
According to the ACLU, there are important factual issues in the case, such as the many ways in which domestic partnership differs from marriage, that call for the kind of testimony that same-sex couples can provide to the Court. To consider this important evidence, the Supreme Court should refuse to accept this case directly but instead allow a circuit court to develop the factual record.
During the political campaign for the anti-gay marriage amendment that is the basis for this lawsuit, these same anti-gay activists told the voters that domestic partner benefits would not be affected by the amendment and legislators said that the state would be allowed to pass a law giving same-sex couples some legal protections.
“The anti-gay activists misled the voters into passing the amendment by saying that it would not affect the rights of domestic partners. Then they tried to prevent the legislature from providing modest legal protections for same-sex couples. And soon after the bill went into effect, they brought a lawsuit to take those protections away, based on the amendment that they said would not affect such rights” said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project. “It’s incredible the lengths they will go to deny committed couples basic protections for their families.”
The same-sex couples asking to be allowed into the lawsuit include:
Jayne Dunnum and Robin Timm from Plattsville, WI, have been together for 17 years. After Timm was injured on their farm and had to be rushed to the emergency room, they worry about being able to visit each other in the hospital and are hoping the domestic partner law will put an end to these worries.
Carol Schumacher and Virginia Wolf from Eau Claire, WI, have been together for 34 years. As they enter their senior years, the domestic partner law would ease their worries about being shut out of conversations about each other’s medical care and other end-of-life decisions and guarantee that they are not barred from sharing a room if they end up in a nursing home.
Wendy and Mary Woodruff from Milwaukee, WI, have been together for 12 years. As a minister for the Metropolitan Community Church, Rev. Wendy Woodruff has had to console a congregant who lost everything, including her home and furniture, when her partner was killed and the partner’s relatives claimed their entire estate. They fear the same thing would happen to them without the inheritance protections of the domestic partner law.
Judith Trampf and Katy Heyning from Madison, WI, celebrated their 20th Anniversary this summer. A few years back, Heyning had a seizure that left her unable to drive for six months. Unable to take family leave, Trampf had to use her vacation time to drive Katy to doctor’s appointments and to and from work. Under the domestic partner law, the couple would finally gain access to family leave protection.
Diane Schermann and Missy Collins from Eau Claire, WI, have known each other for 10 years and have been a couple for five. The couple is raising seven children, including Diane’s two children from a previous marriage, a new baby that Missy gave birth to through in vitro fertilization and four foster children, two of which are relatives of Collins. Like many couples their age, the couple has put off making wills because of the expense. The domestic partner law would guarantee that at least half of their joint property automatically passes to each other.
Lambda Legal also filed papers today to intervene in the Appling v. Doyle case on behalf of Fair Wisconsin, the statewide equality organization, and its members. Lambda Legal, like the ACLU, says domestic partnerships and marriages are not "substantially similar."
Linda Hansen, David Froiland, Jason Plowman, Daniel Manna and David Goroff of Foley & Lardner, LLP are assisting ACLU attorneys Dupuis and Knight in representing the couples. Additional information about the ACLU’s motion, including bios and photographs of the couples and the legal documents filed today are available online.
Friday, August 28, 2009
News roundup: voting rights bill gathers momentum, update on DP registry challenge
A news round up from the week – good civil liberties articles and issues you don’t want to miss!
LGBT Rights
The Governor is hiring an outside council to represent the state in the challenge to the domestic partner registry. Lester Pines has represented the state before, most recently in the challenge against the Attorney General’s plan to make the Government Accountability Board purge the voter rolls before the 2008 elections.
Also, don’t get too confused as there is another challenge still pending. This one against the language of the ballot question itself. That hearing is set for November of this year.
Voting Rights
The ACLU of Wisconsin was a part of the hearings for AB 353, a bill that would restore voting rights to felons who are no longer incarcerated and are now living in our communities. The bill made the issues section of the Wisconsin State Journal and there was a supportive letter to the editor. The hearing got some media hits including on WPR headlines, a clip on the Wisconsin Radio Network site.
It’s difficult to find organizations that oppose this common sense voting rights measure. But the Attorney General made a statement against it. Read more about the issue and write your own letter to the editor of your local paper.
LGBT Rights
The Governor is hiring an outside council to represent the state in the challenge to the domestic partner registry. Lester Pines has represented the state before, most recently in the challenge against the Attorney General’s plan to make the Government Accountability Board purge the voter rolls before the 2008 elections.
Also, don’t get too confused as there is another challenge still pending. This one against the language of the ballot question itself. That hearing is set for November of this year.
Voting Rights
The ACLU of Wisconsin was a part of the hearings for AB 353, a bill that would restore voting rights to felons who are no longer incarcerated and are now living in our communities. The bill made the issues section of the Wisconsin State Journal and there was a supportive letter to the editor. The hearing got some media hits including on WPR headlines, a clip on the Wisconsin Radio Network site.
It’s difficult to find organizations that oppose this common sense voting rights measure. But the Attorney General made a statement against it. Read more about the issue and write your own letter to the editor of your local paper.
Friday, August 21, 2009
News roundup: tickets for cursing, public financing for judges, AG says no on DP benefits case and more
A news roundup from the week – good civil liberties articles and issues you don’t want to miss!
Free Speech
The Kenosha News picked up the story about a proposal to allow police to ticket the use of curse words against them.
And there was more coverage of the case of the man in Crivitz who flew his flag upside down. The flag pole got knocked down by angry residents. But then supporters helped to fix it. There was more coverage on NBC 15 and on WBAY-TV.
Fair Elections
The Impartial Justice bill got approval from the state Senate this week, making it one more step closer to becoming law. While public financing of campaigns is often controversial, the big money that influences state Supreme Court elections has made the past few competitive judicial seat races a cause for concern. If judges are to remain impartial, so should their sponsorship. See more about the issue on the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign website.
Lesbian and Gay Rights
Attorney General JB Van Hollen won’t represent the state in the Wisconsin Family Action challenge to the domestic partnership registry. This just means that the governor’s office will hire its own attorneys (special council). Probably will be pricey just to prove that a partnership registry with a handful of benefits isn’t anything even substantially similar to marriage.
Racial Disparity and Public Schools
Here’s a good article that explains “open enrollment” trends in Madison area schools. Open enrollment allows students to transfer to other schools if they are dissatisfied with their district. Civil rights advocates say that open enrollment leads to greater racial segregation and an erosion of Brown v. Board of Education. A quickly increasing number of students living in poverty is cited among violence and negative peer pressure as reasons to switch.
Event: Wisconsin Books to Prisoners Book Sale
Sat. Aug. 29th 12:00 Noon - 5:00 pm Orton Park Festival - near the corner of Rutledge and Few. Wisconsin Books To Prisoners Book Sale! Drop off your donated books and look over our fine collection of reading materials! All proceeds will go towards postage to send new books to those who are eager to read within the WI prison system. WI Books to Prisoners is a project of Rainbow Bookstore. For more details contact Rainbow Books (608) 257-6050.
Free Speech
The Kenosha News picked up the story about a proposal to allow police to ticket the use of curse words against them.
And there was more coverage of the case of the man in Crivitz who flew his flag upside down. The flag pole got knocked down by angry residents. But then supporters helped to fix it. There was more coverage on NBC 15 and on WBAY-TV.
Fair Elections
The Impartial Justice bill got approval from the state Senate this week, making it one more step closer to becoming law. While public financing of campaigns is often controversial, the big money that influences state Supreme Court elections has made the past few competitive judicial seat races a cause for concern. If judges are to remain impartial, so should their sponsorship. See more about the issue on the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign website.
Lesbian and Gay Rights
Attorney General JB Van Hollen won’t represent the state in the Wisconsin Family Action challenge to the domestic partnership registry. This just means that the governor’s office will hire its own attorneys (special council). Probably will be pricey just to prove that a partnership registry with a handful of benefits isn’t anything even substantially similar to marriage.
Racial Disparity and Public Schools
Here’s a good article that explains “open enrollment” trends in Madison area schools. Open enrollment allows students to transfer to other schools if they are dissatisfied with their district. Civil rights advocates say that open enrollment leads to greater racial segregation and an erosion of Brown v. Board of Education. A quickly increasing number of students living in poverty is cited among violence and negative peer pressure as reasons to switch.
Event: Wisconsin Books to Prisoners Book Sale
Sat. Aug. 29th 12:00 Noon - 5:00 pm Orton Park Festival - near the corner of Rutledge and Few. Wisconsin Books To Prisoners Book Sale! Drop off your donated books and look over our fine collection of reading materials! All proceeds will go towards postage to send new books to those who are eager to read within the WI prison system. WI Books to Prisoners is a project of Rainbow Bookstore. For more details contact Rainbow Books (608) 257-6050.
Friday, August 7, 2009
News roundup: fair housing victory, NIMBY on detainees, blogging on profiling and more
Here’s a quick wrap-up of some civil liberties related news of the week…
Fair Housing
The ACLU of Wisconsin won a court case against the city of South Milwaukee to prevent the razing of an apartment building that housed a large portion of the city’s minority population. More details to come.
Close Guantanamo
Last month, some legislators introduced a bill to reject any Gitmo detainees from being housed in Wisconsin jails. It’s a move that legislators are attempting across the country to stir debate about terrorism, even though we already have many convicted terrorists behind bars on US soil (remember the perps from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing? Oklahoma City fed building bombing? Even Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui is in Colorado). But this week, the Obama Administration was talking about the complexity of dealing with the often-uncharged detainees and that they might try to build a courthouse/supermax combo in Michigan or Kansas.
If you haven’t already, tell President Obama to reject indefinite detention and close Guantanamo asap.
Census and Redistricting
Census folks have been out in neighborhoods to confirm addresses since the spring, but the big count won’t happen until 2010. One of the big questions will be around how the count of prisoners will be used in future redistricting of politicans’ turf. A timely op-ed from the NY Times describes why counting prisoners where they are incarcerated makes redistricting complicated and unbalanced. Our own Wisconsin state legislators will be talking about Assembly Joint Resolution 63 which would exclude the census’ prisoner count from redistricting plans. The hearing will be on September 3.
Voting Rights
Senator Russ Feingold helped to introduce legislation at the federal level to end discrimination in voting rights against people with felony convictions. This interesting article gives the perspective from the southern states and describes why this voting rights issue echoes the long history of both Jim Crow and the prison industrial complex.
Response to the Wisconsin Democracy Restoration bill has been good. A large coalition of organizations is behind it and to date we have only found two blog posts against it (one from Sen. Mary Lazich and another from the same folks who brought complaints about gay and lesbian books in the West Bend community library.
Speaking of voting, did you get a letter from the Government Accountability Board about your voter registration status? They are cleaning up their databases. See your city clerk to get your info updated.
Racial Profiling
Opinions are mixed about the new seat belt/racial data collection item the budget the Governor signed last month. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation cited the new law that would give police the power to pull drivers over for not wearing a seat belt as a reason for record-low traffic fatalities in July. However, the Milwaukee County Sheriff is blogging about how the racial profiling data collection is a tool of exploitation by “race hustlers” and that ACLU has nothing better to do than to sue police.
Sheriff Clarke might have missed the report and recommendations issued last year by the Office of Justice Assistance and the Governor’s Commission on Reducing Racial Disparities in the Wisconsin Justice System. The commission included police, corrections and housing experts, judges, lawyers, academics, community and faith leaders. The report strongly recommended that “throughout the state, we must increase and improve the validity and reliability of data, e.g. collecting and making data available,” and that “appropriate state agencies should be directed to conduct a county-by-county baseline study of racial disparity using existing traffic citation and arrest data to determine (racial) disparity levels in the state.” The report is supposed to be a blueprint for effectively addressing our disproportionate minority incarceration rate in our state.
The reality is that racial profiling is one slice of the pie that makes Wisconsin one of the worst states for putting people of color behind bars. Anyone could suggest that a Governor's commission and an OJA report is politically motivated. But disproportionate minority contact by law enforcement is a systemic problem. A systemic problem is bigger than a few racist cops. A systemic problem is bigger than one sheriff who feels politically targeted. And a systemic problem needs a systemic analysis. Buckle up drivers!
Gay and Lesbian Rights
The domestic partner registry began this week. In Dane County, 50 couples registered on the first day. County clerks had geared up for lines of couples waiting to register. While the Cap Times article says that applying for the registry has the same process as getting a marriage license, both the state Legislative Council and the ACLU of Wisconsin said that the registry does not equate marriage.
But organizations like the “Wisconsin Family Action” are still insisting that the domestic partnership provisions are “marriage-like” and have filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The ACLU of Wisconsin has committed to fighting a legal challenge to domestic partnerships in the state.
Fair Housing
The ACLU of Wisconsin won a court case against the city of South Milwaukee to prevent the razing of an apartment building that housed a large portion of the city’s minority population. More details to come.
Close Guantanamo
Last month, some legislators introduced a bill to reject any Gitmo detainees from being housed in Wisconsin jails. It’s a move that legislators are attempting across the country to stir debate about terrorism, even though we already have many convicted terrorists behind bars on US soil (remember the perps from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing? Oklahoma City fed building bombing? Even Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui is in Colorado). But this week, the Obama Administration was talking about the complexity of dealing with the often-uncharged detainees and that they might try to build a courthouse/supermax combo in Michigan or Kansas.
If you haven’t already, tell President Obama to reject indefinite detention and close Guantanamo asap.
Census and Redistricting
Census folks have been out in neighborhoods to confirm addresses since the spring, but the big count won’t happen until 2010. One of the big questions will be around how the count of prisoners will be used in future redistricting of politicans’ turf. A timely op-ed from the NY Times describes why counting prisoners where they are incarcerated makes redistricting complicated and unbalanced. Our own Wisconsin state legislators will be talking about Assembly Joint Resolution 63 which would exclude the census’ prisoner count from redistricting plans. The hearing will be on September 3.
Voting Rights
Senator Russ Feingold helped to introduce legislation at the federal level to end discrimination in voting rights against people with felony convictions. This interesting article gives the perspective from the southern states and describes why this voting rights issue echoes the long history of both Jim Crow and the prison industrial complex.
Response to the Wisconsin Democracy Restoration bill has been good. A large coalition of organizations is behind it and to date we have only found two blog posts against it (one from Sen. Mary Lazich and another from the same folks who brought complaints about gay and lesbian books in the West Bend community library.
Speaking of voting, did you get a letter from the Government Accountability Board about your voter registration status? They are cleaning up their databases. See your city clerk to get your info updated.
Racial Profiling
Opinions are mixed about the new seat belt/racial data collection item the budget the Governor signed last month. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation cited the new law that would give police the power to pull drivers over for not wearing a seat belt as a reason for record-low traffic fatalities in July. However, the Milwaukee County Sheriff is blogging about how the racial profiling data collection is a tool of exploitation by “race hustlers” and that ACLU has nothing better to do than to sue police.
Sheriff Clarke might have missed the report and recommendations issued last year by the Office of Justice Assistance and the Governor’s Commission on Reducing Racial Disparities in the Wisconsin Justice System. The commission included police, corrections and housing experts, judges, lawyers, academics, community and faith leaders. The report strongly recommended that “throughout the state, we must increase and improve the validity and reliability of data, e.g. collecting and making data available,” and that “appropriate state agencies should be directed to conduct a county-by-county baseline study of racial disparity using existing traffic citation and arrest data to determine (racial) disparity levels in the state.” The report is supposed to be a blueprint for effectively addressing our disproportionate minority incarceration rate in our state.
The reality is that racial profiling is one slice of the pie that makes Wisconsin one of the worst states for putting people of color behind bars. Anyone could suggest that a Governor's commission and an OJA report is politically motivated. But disproportionate minority contact by law enforcement is a systemic problem. A systemic problem is bigger than a few racist cops. A systemic problem is bigger than one sheriff who feels politically targeted. And a systemic problem needs a systemic analysis. Buckle up drivers!
Gay and Lesbian Rights
The domestic partner registry began this week. In Dane County, 50 couples registered on the first day. County clerks had geared up for lines of couples waiting to register. While the Cap Times article says that applying for the registry has the same process as getting a marriage license, both the state Legislative Council and the ACLU of Wisconsin said that the registry does not equate marriage.
But organizations like the “Wisconsin Family Action” are still insisting that the domestic partnership provisions are “marriage-like” and have filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The ACLU of Wisconsin has committed to fighting a legal challenge to domestic partnerships in the state.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
