New York (USA)

New York legislators have vowed to fight on for “gender identity” protections in the next session of the New York State Assembly.  The measure – the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (“GENDA”) – would give statewide legal protections to people who are denied employment, housing, access to health care, or access to stores or restaurants because of their “gender identity or expression,” unhelpfully defined as “having or being perceived as having a gender identity, self image, appearance, behavior or expression whether or not that gender identity, self image, appearance, behavior or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the sex assigned to that person at birth.”

Summary of GENDA

Prior version of GENDA

News report

.

Virginia (USA)

S.B. 701 would ban discrimination based on “sexual orientation” by state agencies, institutions, boards, bureaus, commissions, councils, or instrumentalities of the Commonwealth. “Sexual orientation” means a person’s actual or perceived heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality, or gender identity or expression.

S.B. 701 does not define “gender identity or expression.”

S.B. 701

 

Kosilek v. Spencer (Massachusetts, USA)

U.S. Chief Judge Mark Wolf of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ordered the Massachusetts Department of Correction to hire an independent specialist to determine whether the state must provide convicted murderer Robert Kosilek electrolysis as he waits to undergo taxpayer-financed sex reassignment surgery.

In September, Wolf ruled that Kosilek, who strangled his wife, Cheryl McCaul, in 1990, is entitled to the surgery because it is a medically necessary treatment for his gender identity disorder.

Governor Deval Patrick’s administration will appeal Wolf’s ruling and has asked the court to delay his surgery.

mlw order 10 24 12 final

More on Kosilek

Galbreath v. Oklahoma City (Oklahoma, USA)

In response to a call reporting a suspicious black man wearing high heels, police arrested Allen Galbreath for disorderly conduct.  Galbreath lived across the street and was in the park to exercise in women’s shoes while carrying a purse. The state subsequently dropped disorderly conduct charges.  Galbreath sued, claiming that his arrest occurred because his gender “expressions do not conform to traditional gender stereotypes or mainstream tastes.”

Continue reading “Galbreath v. Oklahoma City (Oklahoma, USA)”

Grey v. Hasbrouck (USA)

Cook County, Illinois Judge Michael Hyman has approved a consent decree in a class action case to allow transgender individuals to receive new birth certificates without being required to undergo genital surgery.

The Illinois Department of Public Health is now  prohibited from denying new Illinois birth certificates to applicants who seek to change the gender (sic) marker on them solely because they have not had sex reassignment surgery.

News report.

ACLU Press release.

Matter of Birney v New York City Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene (New York, USA)

In March, a New York City trial court ordered the New York City Department of Health to accept a note from a doctor as proof of “corrective surgery” necessary to support a name change by a transgender man.  The Department requested that Louis Birney provide the name of the specific surgery performed on him in order to be satisfied that Birney underwent corrective surgery.  The Department claims that robust proof of a permanent sex change safeguards the integrity of a crucial identity record, one used to obtain important items ranging from passports to government benefits.  Birney said the request invaded his privacy.

2012-ny-slip-op-30654-u

Pennsylvania (USA)

Pennsylvania is the latest state to consider the Prohibition on Sexual Orientation Change Efforts on Mental Health Treatment Act. H.B. 2691 bans “sexual orientation change efforts” towards minors  under age 18.  “Sexual orientation change efforts” includes efforts to change behaviors or “gender expressions.”

H.B. 2691

New Jersey (USA)

New Jersey legislators have introduced a bill to ban reparative therapy and “sexual orientation change efforts” for minors.   Sexual orientation change efforts means the practice of seeking to change a person’s sexual orientation, including, but not limited to, efforts to change behaviors, gender identity, or gender expressions, or to reduce or eliminate sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward a person of the same gender; except that sexual orientation change efforts does not include counseling for a person seeking to transition from one gender to another, or counseling that:

(1)   provides acceptance, support, and understanding of a person or facilitates a person’s coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions to prevent or address unlawful conduct or unsafe sexual practices; and

(2)   does not seek to change sexual orientation.

So, counseling that affirms your delusions of gender is okay, counseling that questions your delusions of gender would be illegal.

A.B. 3371