DOCSLIB.ORG

CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD Measuring Support for Equality in the 116Th Congress Dear Friends

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD Measuring Support for Equality in the 116Th Congress Dear Friends CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD Measuring Support for Equality in the 116th Congress Dear Friends, Over these last two years, Donald Trump and Mike Pence have remained relentless in their anti-equality attacks. From targeting LGBTQ people’s access to health care, to supporting discrimination against LGBTQ people in the workplace, to the appointment of extreme anti-LGBTQ judges to the federal bench, this White House has redoubled their efforts to undermine our community’s progress. But the past two years have also seen critical steps towards LGBTQ equality at the federal level, thanks to the pro-equality majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. In May of 2019, the U.S. House passed the Equality Act. This is the first time a chamber of Congress has approved a comprehensive LGBTQ civil rights bill in our nation’s history. The Supreme Court decision in Bostock this summer, affirming that sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination are prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, was an important step forward for LGBTQ equality, but much work remains. In many aspects of the public square, LGBTQ people still lack non-discrimination protections, which is why we need to make the Equality Act the law of the land to address the significant gaps in federal civil rights laws and improve protections for everyone. The interwoven nature of LGBTQ equality with the progress of all communities demands leadership committed to advancing justice for all. From working to increase public safety with the passage of long overdue gun background checks legislation, restoring the Voting Rights Act to ensure access at the ballot box, and guaranteeing Dreamers can stay in the only country they have ever known, pro-equality leaders in the House advanced crucial legislation for marginalized communities across the nation. And thanks to this pro-equality majority in the U.S. House, our elected champions were able to block legislation seeking to undermine our progress. 2 HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD | 116th CONGRESS If the U.S. House has been busy working for the welfare of the American people, the U.S. Senate’s tenure for the past two years has been marked by inaction and misplaced priorities. Instead of advancing pro-equality legislation, the Senate’s leadership has stymied their progress. Rather, the Senate has focused on confirming as many individuals to lifetime seats on the federal bench as possible. In addition to their lack of diversity, many appointees lack the basic qualifications—as objectively assessed by the American Bar Association—to sit on the federal bench. And a great many have shown hostility to LGBTQ people. We hope this scorecard will aid in understanding your elected officials’ records on issues impacting the LGBTQ community and society’s most marginalized. And we hope it is a valuable tool in holding your elected officials accountable in our shared work towards meaningful, positive change. As the late Representative John Lewis wrote, “Democracy is not a state. It is an act, and each generation must do its part to help build what we called the Beloved Community, a nation and world society at peace with itself.” In Unity, Alphonso David He/Him/His HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD | 116th CONGRESS 3 U.S. Senate A Nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court of the United States On October 26, 2020, the Senate voted on President Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Senate confirmed the nomination by a vote of 52-48 (Roll Call Vote No. 224, 2nd Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 0 yes, 45 no, 0 not voting; Republicans – 52 yes, 1 no, 0 not voting; Independents – 0 yes, 2 no, 0 not voting. HRC opposed the nomination. B Nomination of William Barr to be U.S. Attorney General On February 14, 2019, the Senate voted on President Trump’s nomination of William Barr to serve as U.S. Attorney General. The Senate confirmed his nomination by a vote of 54-45 (Roll Call Vote No. 24, 1st Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 3 yes, 42 no, 0 not voting; Republicans – 51 yes, 1 no, 1 not voting; Independents – 0 yes, 2 no, 0 not voting. HRC opposed the nomination. C Nomination of Matthew Kacsmaryk to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas On June 19, 2019, the Senate voted on President Trump’s nomination of Matthew Kacsmaryk to serve as a Judge for the Northern District of Texas. The Senate confirmed the nomination by a vote of 52-46 (Roll Call Vote No. 172, 1st Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 0 yes, 43 no, 2 not voting; Republicans – 52 yes, 1 no, 0 not voting; Independents – 0 yes, 2 no, 0 not voting. HRC opposed the nomination. D Nomination of Steven Menashi to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals On November 14, 2019, the Senate voted on President Trump’s nomination of Steven Menashi to serve as a Judge for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The Senate confirmed his nomination by a vote of 51-41 (Roll Call Vote No. 356, 1st Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 0 yes, 39 no, 6 not voting; Republicans – 51 yes, 1 no, 1 not voting; Independents – 0 yes, 1 no, 1 not voting. HRC opposed the nomination. E Nomination of Lawrence VanDyke to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals On December 11, 2019, the Senate voted on President Trump’s nomination of Lawrence VanDyke to serve as a Judge for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Senate confirmed the nomination by a vote of 51-44 (Roll Call Vote No. 391, 1st Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 0 yes, 42 no, 3 not voting; Republicans – 51 yes, 1 no, 1 not voting; Independents – 0 yes, 1 no, 1 not voting. HRC opposed the nomination. 4 HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD | 116th CONGRESS F Nomination of Justin Walker to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals On June 18, 2020, the Senate voted on President Trump’s nomination of Justin Walker to serve as a Judge for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The Senate confirmed the nomination by a vote of 51-42 (Roll Call Vote No. 123, 2nd Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 0 yes, 40 no, 5 not voting; Republicans – 51 yes, 1 no, 1 not voting; Independents – 0 yes, 1 no, 1 not voting. HRC opposed the nomination. G Nomination of Stephen Schwartz to the Court of Federal Claims On December 8, 2020, the Senate voted on President Trump’s nomination of Stephen Schwartz to serve as a Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims. The Senate confirmed the nomination by a vote of 49-47 (Roll Call Vote No. 256, 2nd Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 0 yes, 45 no, 1 not voting; Republicans – 49 yes, 0 no, 3 not voting; Independents – 0 yes, 2 no, 0 not voting. HRC opposed the nomination. H Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to the JUSTICE Act (S. 3985) Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) introduced the JUSTICE Act to address law enforcement reform and accountability. However, the bill failed to provide real policing reform. The Senate rejected cloture on the motion to proceed to the bill on June 24, 2020, by a vote of 55-45 (Roll Call Vote No. 126, 2nd Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 2 yes, 43 no, 0 not voting; Republicans – 52 yes, 1 no, 0 not voting; Independents – 1 yes, 1 no, 0 not voting. HRC opposed cloture on the motion to proceed. I Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, Article I (H.Res. 755) The House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment of President Donald Trump, including Article I regarding the president’s abuse of power by soliciting a foreign government to interfere in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The Senate found President Donald Trump not guilty of Article I on February 5, 2020, by a vote of 48-52 (Roll Call Vote No. 33, 2nd Session, 116th Congress). Democrats – 45 guilty, 0 not guilty, 0 not voting; Republicans – 1 guilty, 52 not guilty, 0 not voting; Independents – 2 guilty, 0 not guilty, 0 not voting. HRC urged a vote of guilty. J Equality Act (S. 788) (Co-Sponsorship) Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation introduced on March 13, 2019, that would provide consistent and explicit non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people across key areas of life, including employment, housing, credit, education, public spaces and services, federally funded programs, and jury service. The measure had 47 co-sponsors: Democrats 44; Republicans 1; Independents 2. K John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (S. 4263) (Co-Sponsorship) Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation introduced on July 22, 2020, that would strengthen voting rights by expanding and strengthening the government's ability to respond to voting discrimination. The measure had 48 co-sponsors: Democrats 45; Republicans 1; Independents 2. HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD | 116th CONGRESS 5 L Do No Harm Act (S. 593) (Co-Sponsorship) Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation introduced on February 28, 2019, that would amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to exempt areas of law where RFRA has been used to bypass federal protections, including civil rights laws, thus restoring the original intent of the legislation and clarifying that RFRA is intended to protect religious freedom without allowing the infliction of harm on other people. The measure had 34 co-sponsors: Democrats 33; Republicans 0; Independents 1. M Therapeutic Fraud Prevention Act of 2019 (S. 2008) (Co-Sponsorship) Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation introduced on June 27, 2019, that would officially classify the provision and advertising of conversion therapy in exchange for monetary compensation as fraudulent practices and expressly direct the Federal Trade Commission to protect consumers from these harmful and discredited practices.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ben Sasse & Deb Fischer
    NEBRASKA TAXPAYERS FOR FREEDOM: CONGRESS WATCH BULLETIN. THE VOTING RECORD OF YOUR SENATORS: 2019. 304 North 168 Cir. #213 11819 Miracle Hills Dr. #205 Omaha, NE. 68118 Omaha, NE. 68154 Phone: 402-550-8040 Phone: 402-391-3411 Fax: 402-391-4725 Sen. Ben Sasse Sen. Deb Fischer 116th CONGRESS – 2019 NTF voting scores during this session: FISCHER: 99% 1st Session SASSE: 95% Taxes. S.J. Res. 50: To disapprove a conservative IRS rule relating to charitable contributions and estate tax deductions when a taxpayer receives or expects to receive a corresponding state or local tax credit. BAD BILL/ FAILED Fischer: NO Sasse: NO Spending. HR 3055 Amend. 1019: To reduce amounts appropriated by 2% than amount appropriated in FY 2019 for several federal programs. GOOD AMENDMENT/ FAILED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES Amend. 1141: To prohibit a liberal test for mass transit expenditures. GOOD AMENDMENT/ PASSED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES Amend. 1250: To not reduce amount appropriated by 1% and put savings towards EPA infrastructure assistance. BAD AMENDMENT/ PASSED Fischer: NO Sasse: NO HR 3877: To amend the Balanced Budget Act of 1985 to suspend the federal debt limit. BAD BILL/ PASSED Fischer: NO Sasse: NO HR 4378 Amend. 942: To reduce appropriated amount by 2% for several federal agencies. GOOD AMENDMENT/ FAILED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES PN 150: To confirm Gordon Hartogensis as Director of Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. GOOD RESOLUTION/ CONFIRMED Fisher: YES Sasse: YES Government Regulations. PN 22: To confirm Andrew Wheeler as EPA administrator. GOOD RESOLUTION/ CONFIRMED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES PN 47: To confirm Spencer Bacchus III as member of the Export-Import Bank of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Steven Menashi President Trump Nominated Steven Menashi to Serve
    Steven Menashi President Trump nominated Steven Menashi to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on August 14, 2019. Menashi is anti-choice. Career1 Bachelor of Arts, Dartmouth College, 2001 Assistant Editor, Policy Review, Hoover Institution, 2001-2002 Associate Editor, Policy Review, Hoover Institution, 2002-2004 Public Affairs Fellow, Hoover Institution, 2002-2004 Editorial Writer, The New York Sun, 2004-2005 Juris Doctorate, Stanford Law School, 2008 Clerk, Judge Douglas Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 2008-2009 Olin-Searle Fellow, Georgetown University Law Center, 2009-2010 Clerk, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, U.S. Supreme Court, 2010-2011 Associate, Kirkland & Ellis, 2011-2013 Of Counsel, Kirkland & Ellis, 2013-2015, 2016-2017 Partner, Kirkland & Ellis, 2015-2016 Koch-Searle Research Fellow, New York University School of Law, 2013-2015 Assistant Professor, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School, 2016-2019 (on leave 2017-2019) Acting General Counsel, U.S. Department of Education, 2017-2018 Principal Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of Education, 2018 Special Assistant to the President/Associate Counsel, Office of White House Counsel, The White House, 2018-present Record on Reproductive Freedom Menashi submitted an amicus brief on behalf of former U.S. Department of Justice officials in Zubik v. Burwell arguing that the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive- coverage policy forced certain religious groups into “moral complicity” with the use of contraception, despite an accommodation put in place for such groups by the Obama administration.2 Menashi compared such groups’ “moral complicity” in the use of contraception to providing weapons to help someone commit a crime.3 As editor-in-chief of the Dartmouth Review, Menashi wrote several anti-choice articles and editorials.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapman Law Review
    Chapman Law Review Volume 21 Board of Editors 2017–2018 Executive Board Editor-in-Chief LAUREN K. FITZPATRICK Managing Editor RYAN W. COOPER Senior Articles Editors Production Editor SUNEETA H. ISRANI MARISSA N. HAMILTON TAYLOR A. KENDZIERSKI CLARE M. WERNET Senior Notes & Comments Editor TAYLOR B. BROWN Senior Symposium Editor CINDY PARK Senior Submissions & Online Editor ALBERTO WILCHES –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Articles Editors ASHLEY C. ANDERSON KRISTEN N. KOVACICH ARLENE GALARZA STEVEN L. RIMMER NATALIE M. GAONA AMANDA M. SHAUGHNESSY-FORD ANAM A. JAVED DAMION M. YOUNG __________________________________________________________________ Staff Editors RAYMOND AUBELE AMY N. HUDACK JAMIE L. RICE CARLOS BACIO MEGAN A. LEE JAMIE L. TRAXLER HOPE C. BLAIN DANTE P. LOGIE BRANDON R. SALVATIERRA GEORGE E. BRIETIGAM DRAKE A. MIRSCH HANNAH B. STETSON KATHERINE A. BURGESS MARLENA MLYNARSKA SYDNEY L. WEST KYLEY S. CHELWICK NICHOLE N. MOVASSAGHI Faculty Advisor CELESTINE MCCONVILLE, Professor of Law CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY HAZEM H. CHEHABI ADMINISTRATION JEROME W. CWIERTNIA DALE E. FOWLER ’58 DANIELE C. STRUPPA BARRY GOLDFARB President STAN HARRELSON GAVIN S. HERBERT,JR. GLENN M. PFEIFFER WILLIAM K. HOOD Provost and Executive Vice ANDY HOROWITZ President for Academic Affairs MARK CHAPIN JOHNSON ’05 JENNIFER L. KELLER HAROLD W. HEWITT,JR. THOMAS E. MALLOY Executive Vice President and Chief SEBASTIAN PAUL MUSCO Operating Officer RICHARD MUTH (MBA ’05) JAMES J. PETERSON SHERYL A. BOURGEOIS HARRY S. RINKER Executive Vice President for JAMES B. ROSZAK University Advancement THE HONORABLE LORETTA SANCHEZ ’82 HELEN NORRIS MOHINDAR S. SANDHU Vice President and Chief RONALD M. SIMON Information Officer RONALD E. SODERLING KAREN R. WILKINSON ’69 THOMAS C. PIECHOTA DAVID W.
    [Show full text]
  • Contempt of Courts? President Trump's
    CONTEMPT OF COURTS? PRESIDENT TRUMP’S TRANSFORMATION OF THE JUDICIARY Brendan Williams* Faced with a letter from the American Bar Association (ABA) assessing him as “arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice,” Lawrence VanDyke, nominated by President Trump to serve on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, cried during an October 2019 confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.1 Republican senators dutifully attacked the ABA as liberally-biased.2 In a Wall Street Journal column, a defender of VanDyke assailed what he called a “smear campaign” and wrote that “[t]he ABA’s aggressive politicization is especially frustrating for someone like me, an active member of the ABA[.]”3 VanDyke was confirmed anyway.4 Contrary to Republican protestations, the ABA has deemed 97% of President Trump’s nominees to be “well qualified” or “qualified.”5 Indeed, in the most polarizing judicial nomination of the Trump Administration, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh’s defenders pointed to the ABA having rated him “well qualified” despite the association having once, in 2006, dropped his rating to “qualified” due to concerns about his temperament.6 *Attorney Brendan Williams is the author of over 30 law review articles, predominantly on civil rights and health care issues. A former Washington Supreme Court judicial clerk, Brendan is a New Hampshire long-term care advocate. This article is dedicated to his father Wayne Williams, admitted to the Washington bar in 1970. 1Hannah Knowles, Trump Judicial Nominee Cries over Scathing Letter from the American Bar Association, WASH. POST (Oct. 30, 2015). 2Id.
    [Show full text]
  • Trump Judges: Even More Extreme Than Reagan and Bush Judges
    Trump Judges: Even More Extreme Than Reagan and Bush Judges September 3, 2020 Executive Summary In June, President Donald Trump pledged to release a new short list of potential Supreme Court nominees by September 1, 2020, for his consideration should he be reelected in November. While Trump has not yet released such a list, it likely would include several people he has already picked for powerful lifetime seats on the federal courts of appeals. Trump appointees' records raise alarms about the extremism they would bring to the highest court in the United States – and the people he would put on the appellate bench if he is reelected to a second term. According to People For the American Way’s ongoing research, these judges (including those likely to be on Trump’s short list), have written or joined more than 100 opinions or dissents as of August 31 that are so far to the right that in nearly one out of every four cases we have reviewed, other Republican-appointed judges, including those on Trump’s previous Supreme Court short lists, have disagreed with them.1 Considering that every Republican president since Ronald Reagan has made a considerable effort to pick very conservative judges, the likelihood that Trump could elevate even more of his extreme judicial picks raises serious concerns. On issues including reproductive rights, voting rights, police violence, gun safety, consumer rights against corporations, and the environment, Trump judges have consistently sided with right-wing special interests over the American people – even measured against other Republican-appointed judges. Many of these cases concern majority rulings issued or joined by Trump judges.
    [Show full text]
  • The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies 2009 Annual Report
    The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies 2009 Annual Report “The Courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise will instead of JUDGMENT, the consequences would be the substitution of their pleasure for that of the legislative body.” The Federalist 78 THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY aw schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a L form of orthodox liberal ideology which advocates a centralized and uniform society. While some members of the academic community have dissented from these views, by and large they are taught simultaneously with (and indeed as if they were) the law. The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities. This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law. It also requires restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, law students and professors. In working to achieve these goals, the Society has created a conservative intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community.
    [Show full text]
  • October 29, 2019 OPPOSE the CONFIRMATION of LAWRENCE
    Officers October 29, 2019 Chair Judith L. Lichtman National Partnership for Women & Families Vice Chairs Thomas A. Saenz Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund Hilary Shelton OPPOSE THE CONFIRMATION OF LAWRENCE VANDYKE TO THE NAACP Secretary/Treasurer U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Lee A. Saunders American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees Board of Directors Dear Senator: Kevin Allis National Congress of American Indians Kimberly Churches AAUW On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of more Kristen Clarke Lawyers' Committee for than 200 national organizations committed to promoting and protecting the civil and human Civil Rights Under Law Alphonso B. David rights of all persons in the United States, I write in strong opposition to the confirmation of Human Rights Campaign Lily Eskelsen García Lawrence VanDyke to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. National Education Association Fatima Goss Graves National Women's Law Center Mary Kay Henry Mr. VanDyke has labored throughout his career to undercut civil and human rights, Service Employees International Union Sherrilyn Ifill including LGBTQ equality, reproductive freedom, environmental protection, and gun safety, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. among other critical issues. He has used his government positions – currently as a Trump David H. Inoue Japanese American Citizens League administration official and previously as the solicitor general in Montana and Nevada – to Gary Jones International Union, UAW push an activist, far-right agenda. He lacks the support of his home-state senators, which Derrick Johnson NAACP traditionally would have stopped his nomination in its tracks.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record on Choice
    2019 Congressional Record on Choice Government Relations Department 1725 I Street, NW Suite 900 Washington, DC 20006 202.973.3000 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON CHOICE 116TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION NARAL Pro-Choice America’s 2019 Congressional Record on Choice documents the key House and Senate votes on reproduc- For over 50 years, NARAL Pro-Choice tive freedom taken during the first session of the 116th Congress. The 116th Congress reflects a wave of historic firsts—most America has led the fight for repro- significantly the first pro-choice majority in the House of Representatives. There are a record number of women serving ductive freedom for everyone, includ- in the House, and more LGBTQ people serving in Congress than ever before. The freshman class is also younger than most ing the right to access abortion. recent incoming classes and the 116th Congress reflects record breaking racial, ethnic, and religious diversity. Nowhere was the new pro-choice House majority more NARAL Pro-Choice America is powered evident than in the appropriations process. House spending bills for fiscal year 2020 reflected increased funding for vital by our 2.5 million members—in every family planning programs, defunded harmful abstinence-on- ly-until-marriage programs, and blocked many of the Trump administration’s efforts to use the regulatory process to state and congressional district. restrict access to abortion and family planning services. Though the House bills were not passed by the Senate, we We represent the more than 7 in 10 now see what can happen when lawmakers committed to reproductive rights are in control.
    [Show full text]
  • Contempt of Courts? President Trump's
    CONTEMPT OF COURTS? PRESIDENT TRUMP’S TRANSFORMATION OF THE JUDICIARY Brendan Williams* Faced with a letter from the American Bar Association (ABA) assessing him as “arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice,” Lawrence VanDyke, nominated by President Trump to serve on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, cried during an October 2019 confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.1 Republican senators dutifully attacked the ABA as liberally-biased.2 In a Wall Street Journal column, a defender of VanDyke assailed what he called a “smear campaign” and wrote that “[t]he ABA’s aggressive politicization is especially frustrating for someone like me, an active member of the ABA[.]”3 VanDyke was confirmed anyway.4 Contrary to Republican protestations, the ABA has deemed 97% of President Trump’s nominees to be “well qualified” or “qualified.”5 Indeed, in the most polarizing judicial nomination of the Trump Administration, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh’s defenders pointed to the ABA having rated him “well qualified” despite the association having once, in 2006, dropped his rating to “qualified” due to concerns about his temperament.6 *Attorney Brendan Williams is the author of over 30 law review articles, predominantly on civil rights and health care issues. A former Washington Supreme Court judicial clerk, Brendan is a New Hampshire long-term care advocate. This article is dedicated to his father Wayne Williams, admitted to the Washington bar in 1970. 1Hannah Knowles, Trump Judicial Nominee Cries over Scathing Letter from the American Bar Association, WASH. POST (Oct. 30, 2015). 2Id.
    [Show full text]
  • In Its Third Year in Office, the Trump Administration Dramatically Expanded Discriminatory Anti-LGBT Policies
    In its third year in office, the Trump Administration dramatically expanded discriminatory anti-LGBT policies Connor Simonoff, Tim Wang, and Sean Cahill PB 1 2 3 INTRODUCTION In 2019, the Trump Administration dramatically expanded upon the discriminatory policies implemented in 20171 and 20182 that are harming the health and well-being of LGBTQIA+ people in America and around the world. It rolled back sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) nondiscrimination provisions in health care, employment, and housing, and expanded discriminatory religious refusal policies. It appointed more anti-LGBT federal court judges and further attempted to roll back the collection of sexual orientation and gender identity data that is critical to understanding LGBT health disparities. It also enacted anti-immigration policies that advocates say directly contributed to the deaths of two trans- gender women seeking asylum3,4 and are also disproportionately affecting LGBT asylum seekers, generally.5 The Trump Administration did take some positive actions in its third year in office. It launched the Ending the HIV Epidemic Initiative, an ambitious campaign to end the domes- tic HIV epidemic. It also launched a global campaign, which President Trump spoke about before the United Nations in September,6 to advocate for the repeal of 70 laws in other countries that criminalize same-sex sexual behavior. However, ongoing anti-LGBT policies by the Trump Administration threaten to undermine progress made by the Ending the HIV Epidemic Initiative,7 and global LGBT advocates claim that there is no substance to the decriminalization effort.8 They also point to other anti-LGBT actions taken by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Filling the New York Federal District Court Vacancies
    Washington and Lee Law Review Online Volume 76 Issue 1 Article 1 11-19-2019 Filling the New York Federal District Court Vacancies Carl Tobias University of Richmond School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr-online Part of the Courts Commons, Judges Commons, Law and Politics Commons, and the President/ Executive Department Commons Recommended Citation Carl Tobias, Filling the New York Federal District Court Vacancies, 76 WASH. & LEE L. REV. ONLINE 1 (2019), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr-online/vol76/iss1/1 This Development is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review Online by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Filling the New York Federal District Court Vacancies Carl Tobias∗ Table of Contents I. Introduction .......................................................................... 1 II. Contemporary Selection Difficulties ................................... 3 A. Persistent Vacancies ...................................................... 4 B. The Contemporary Dilemma ......................................... 5 III. Trump Administration Judicial Selection .......................... 6 A. Nomination Process ....................................................... 6 B. Confirmation Process ..................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Races: Us Senate
    2020 CAP TABLE OF CONTENTS A Message from President Rory L. Gamble ………………… 2 Issues …………………………………………………………………3 Political Almanac ……………………………………………… 27 Roll Call …………………………………………………………… 67 UAW NATIONAL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM (CAP) WASHINGTON, D.C. Feb. 2-5, 2020 UAW National Community Action Program (CAP) • Washington DC • February 2-5, 2020 1 A MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT RORY L. GAMBLE Greetings Fellow UAW Activists: Thank you for all your hard work and dedication. With a powerful Community Action Program (CAP) voice, the UAW is a champion for pro- worker policies in our cities and state houses, as well as in Washington. In this current political climate, our activism and energy are needed to defend against bad anti-worker legislation and regulations on health care, taxes, collective bargaining rights, and to fight for social justice and civil liberties. At the UAW we understand that political action is community action. We represent the voice of UAW members, America’s middle-class families and the future jobs and prosperity for our nation. Make no mistake, we are in a fight and we are up against a well-financed, aggressive anti-worker coalition. The influence of wealthy ultra-conservatives has been felt time and time again in Washington and in state capitals. So-called right-to-work legislation has spread into the industrial heartland. Decades of progress on issues such as health and safety, workers’ compensation and others are in peril. Though we lack the money of wealthy conservatives and corporate America, we have an army of committed activists driven not by greed but by the values of equality, fairness and justice.
    [Show full text]