Hello everyone,

Below is an outline of what “Full Federal Equality” entails for crafting an omnibus LGBT equality bill that would outlaw discrimination based on SO&GI in America on an equal basis to that long afforded other groups/statuses. It sets forth all the existing laws, the language where SO&GI is needed, and proposed new provisions where none exists.

Currently, Rep. Jared Polis from Bolder, CO (openly gay) is engaged in an effort to craft an omnibus LGBT equality bill to be filed this year, or by January. He issued an outline covering much of what’s needed, but not all by far. So this was prepared to inform that work, and it has been shared with the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus co-chairs.

The hope is that Rep. Polis and the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus will add the missing provisions, which are major, including (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws discrimination in all federally-funded programs, (b) Federal Marriage Equality to end marriage discrimination across the country, and (c) non-discrimination in Armed Services employment, which was not accomplished by DADT repeal.

Unfortunately, so far it does not appear that the LGBT Caucus is actively coordinating around strategy, or on the omnibus, but rather that individual issues are being addressed by certain Representatives as their own pet-legislative projects. The hope, however, is that this will change in response to growing demand for a coordinated, comprehensive equality strategy.

For a few years now, the mantra of Full Federal Equality has resonated with the grassroots, as evidenced by the National Equality March which brought 250,000 people to D.C., and the The American Equality Bill, which has ever growing support as seen in bold direct actions, City Council Resolutions and Proclamations. So now, as we approach 2012, we hope to see a bill that reflects this growing sentiment and our entitlement, as a matter of international human rights law, to full non-discrimination protections.

Of course, inclusion in the laws themselves will not immediately change the homo/transphobia we suffer as objects of abuse in our own society. But the debate for our inclusion and equality under the law, and the subsequent enforcement of those laws once we’re in, can go a long way toward changing the oppressive culture impeding our human rights, safety and happiness.

Please study this so we can be well informed and hold the key advocates accountable to the pursuit of our full equality. Knowledge is power in politics, and “we the people” need to harness that power today in order to manifest our equality tomorrow.

Fortunately public opinion is growing steadily on our side, so the main task before the grassroots is to shift the “movement agenda” controlled and limited by HRC, NGLTF, and the LGBT Congressional Caucus, from pieces of the pie to the whole enchilada.

This is still a tough challenge of course. But it is doable by a determined few if we work together in common cause and with shared intention, which grows simply by reading and sharing this information.

Let’s make 2012 the year Full Federal Equality hits the national stage, so that our equality is an unavoidable priority in 2013. We’ve waited long enough, and our time has come.

LANGUAGE OF EXISTING

NON-DISCRIMINATION LAWS & JUDICIAL DECISIONS

AND PROPOSED SO&GI INCLUSION

FOR FULL FEDERAL EQUALITY

(includes overview of existing filed bills)

This is intended to present the scope of “full federal equality” for SO&GI, setting forth the existing language and laws, and the needed additions.

With this coverage in an omnibus bill, the LGBT community would have an organizing beacon, a statement of our dignity, and a clear expression of our human right to full and equal non-discrimination protections.

This list encompasses all the provisions of The American Equality Bill, which already covered existing civil rights laws, as well as Federal Marriage Equality, the Uniting American Families Act (Immigration), and Armed Services employment.

(UPDATE NOTE:  The AEB, as of Feb 2012, now covers all of these provisions, and has been retitled the AEB II).

CONTENT:

1.  Public Accommodations (Title II, 1964 Civil Rights Act)(e.g., restaurants, hotels, theaters)
2.  Public Facilities (Title III, 1964 Civil Rights Act)(e.g., courthouses, jails, hospitals, parks)
3.  Federally-Funded Programs (Title VI, 1964 Civil Rights Act)(e.g., adoption, police, schools, homeless youth, heath care, contractors, etc.)
4.  Employment: Private Sector, Civilian & Military Government (Title VII, 1964 Civil Rights Act; 1978 Civil Service Reform Act; 1991 Government Employee Rights Act; 1995 Congressional Accountability Act; Armed Services, 10 U.S.C. Chapter 37).
5.  Housing (Title VIII, 1968 Civil Rights Act a/k/a Fair Housing Act) (e.g., rental, purchase, financing)
6.  Education (Title IX, 1972 Educational Amendments) (e.g., equal access, bullying)
7.  Credit (Equal Credit Opportunity Act) (e.g., credit cards)
8.  Federal Marriage Equality (1967 Supreme Court Decision, Loving v. Virginia) & DOMA Repeal (Respect for Marriage Act).
9.  Immigration, Disability, Family Leave (Uniting American Families Act (proposed); The Americans With Disabilities Act; and Family and Medical Leave Act).
10.  Definitions (of SO&GI, Harassment, Other Provisions).

1. PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS.

This covers hotels, restaurants, and entertainment facilities opened to the public, but privately owned and operated.

’64 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (CRA), TITLE II.
SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin. (42 U.S.C. 2000a) (http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_civil_rights_act_2.htm)

No Existing Filed Bills: Proposed in the American Equality Bill (AEB) & Polis Omnibus Outline.

2. PUBLIC FACILITIES.

This covers state (and subsidiary) owned and operated facilities affording public services (other than schools).
’64 CRA, TITLE III
SEC. 301. (a) Whenever the Attorney General receives a complaint in writing signed by an individual to the effect that he is being deprived of or threatened with the loss of his right to the equal protection of the laws, on account of his race, color, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, by being denied equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof, other than a public school or public college as defined in section 401 of title IV hereof, and the Attorney General believes the complaint is meritorious and certifies that the signer or signers of such complaint are unable, in his judgment, to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings for relief and that the institution of an action will materially further the orderly progress of desegregation and equal access in public facilities, the Attorney General is authorized to institute for or in the name of the United States a civil action in any appropriate district court of the United States against such parties and for such relief as may be appropriate, and such court shall have and shall exercise jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this section. The Attorney General may implead as defendants such additional parties as are or become necessary to the grant of effective relief hereunder. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000b) (http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/42usc2000b.php)

No Existing Filed Bills: Proposed in the AEB & Polis Omnibus Outline.

3. FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS.
The scope of this provision can not be overstated. It reaches to every program and contract that receives federal funding. The Department of Justice coordinates government-wide compliance processes, and has vast enforcement jurisdiction, and states replicate these enforcement activities, as recipient themselves of federal funds. This is the provision via which non-discrimination, as the federal policy of this country, is enforced using the power of the multi-trillion dollar gov’t budget. It reaches into almost every imaginable gov’t service from adoption agencies, to schools, to state and municipal governments, to police departments, hospitals and health care, homeless youth programs, social services, and so on.

TEXT: ’64 CRA, TITLE VI–NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY ASSISTED PROGRAMS
SEC. 601. No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. (42 U.S.C §§ 2000d). (http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/cor/coord/titlevistat.php).

No Existing Filed Bills. Proposed in the AEB. Not in Polis Omnibus Outline (major omission).

Existing Bills in Certain Areas using “Federal Funds” hook:
-Adoption: Every Child Deserves A Family (“An entity that receives Federal assistance or contracts with an entity that receives Federal assistance, and is involved in adoption or foster care placements may not–” discriminate.)
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/ECDF-house-112/

-Students in Public Schools: Student Non-discrimination Act (school programs receiving federal funds; covers SO&GI discrimination & bullying “harassment”).
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/SNDA-house-112/

-Health Care: Ending LGBT Health Disparities Act (not currently refiled) (This is not at all the same scope as Title VI even as to health programs receiving federal funds, but includes lots of provisions tailored to certain areas: medicaid, culturally appropriate care, child insurance, studies, previously filed by Baldwin, not yet refiled but planned; sent to 10 committees last time).

4. EMPLOYMENT: PRIVATE, CIVILIAN GOVERNMENT, ARMED SERVICES.
4.A. PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT.

’64 CRA, TITLE VII–EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
SEC. 703. (a) It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer–
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin; or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin.
(42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 (a) (1) & (2)). (http://www.introlaw.com/ed/laws/titlevii/42usc2000e-02.html)

NOTE: DOJ and Courts have already used: “sex stereotyping” as covered under “sex”, to reach issues of sexual orientation/gender protection. 42 U.S.C. 2000e.

Existing Filed Bill: Employment Non-Discrimination Act (It is debated whether ENDA effectuates the same impact as adding SO&GI directly to the existing laws as indicated above. But ENDA is clearly intended to be the substantial equivalent, crafted by creating a parallel system that incorporates by direct reference the same definitions, and other enforcement aspects of Title VII, and the Gov’t provisions below, including language providing that the “procedures and remedies” are the same as for those claiming a violation under Title VII, and the laws below.)
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/ENDA-house-112/

Related Bills: Direct Addition of Terms Proposed in the AEB.

ENDA proposed in Polis Omnibus Outline.

4.B. CIVILIAN GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT.

’78 CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT
5 U.S.C.2302 (b) Any employee who has authority to take, direct others to take, recommend, or approve any personnel action, shall not, with respect to such authority – (1) discriminate for or against any employee or applicant for employment – (A) on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, as prohibited under section 717 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16); … (http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/5/III/A/23/2302)

5 U.S.C. 2302 (d) This section shall not be construed to extinguish or lessen any effort to achieve equal employment opportunity through affirmative action or any right or remedy available to any employee or applicant for employment in the civil service under – (1) section 717 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16), prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin;  (http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/5/III/A/23/2302)

’91 GOV’T EMPLOYEE RIGHTS ACT
42 U.S.C. 2000e-16a (b) Purpose
The purpose of sections 2000e-16a to 2000e-16c of this title is
to provide procedures to protect the rights of certain government
employees, with respect to their public employment, to be free of
discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, age, or disability. (http://www.introlaw.com/ed/laws/titlevii/42usc2000e-16a.html)

42 U.S.C. 2000e-16b. Discriminatory practices prohibited
(a) Practices
All personnel actions affecting the Presidential appointees
described in section 1219 of title 2 or the State employees
described in section 2000e-16c of this title shall be made free
from any discrimination based on -
(1) race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, within the meaning of section 2000e-16 of this title; …
( http://www.introlaw.com/ed/laws/titlevii/42usc2000e-16a.html)

’95 CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
42 U.S.C. 1311

(a) Discriminatory practices prohibited
All personnel actions affecting covered employees shall be made free from any discrimination based on—
(1) race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, within the meaning of section 703 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–2); …
(http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode02/usc_sec_02_00001311—-000-.html)

3 U.S.C. 411 (a) Discriminatory Practices Prohibited. – All personnel actions affecting covered employees shall be made free from any discrimination based on – (1) race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, within the meaning of section 703 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
( http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/3/5/II/A/411)

Existing Filed Bill: Employment Non-Discrimination Act. (ENDA appears to provide substantially equivalent coverage to that which would be effected by direct inclusion in these provisions, but does not directly insert these terms into the existing laws, as explained above under Private Employment).
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/ENDA-house-112/

Related Bills: Direct Addition of Terms Proposed in the AEB. ENDA Proposed in Polis Omnibus Outline.

4. C. ARMED FORCES EMPLOYMENT.
10 U.S.C. Chapter 37 (As needed to cover SO&GI non-discrimination).

DADT repeal did not outlaw discrimination based on SO or GI in the Armed Services. (See Public Law: 111-321 “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Repeal Act” in reference to 10 U.S.C. Chapter 37, Sec. 654, http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C37.txt).

Previously Filed Existing Bills: The Military Readiness Enhancement Act, (which creates a new section: 10 U.S.C. 656) was filed previously to end SO discrimination in the military, but did not include GI. (Text: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3065:).

Something similar is need that covers both SO&GI.
AOP Whip Count: Not yet refiled.

Proposed in AEB II, Not in Polis Omnibus Outline.

5. FAIR HOUSING.
Title VIII of THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT of 1968 (not 1964)

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act), as amended, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability).

TEXT: Sec. 804. [42 U.S.C. 3604] Discrimination in sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices
As made applicable by section 803 of this title and except as exempted by sections 803(b) and 807 of this title, it shall be unlawful–
(a) To refuse to sell or rent after the making of a bona fide offer, or to refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any person because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin. … (Text: http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/title8.php). ( or: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/progdesc/title8)

Previously Filed Bill: Fair and Inclusive Housing Rights Act (not currently filed).

Proposed in AEB & Polis Omnibus Outline.

6. EDUCATION.
Title IX, EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1972
TEXT: 20 U.S.C. Section 1681. Sec.
(a) Prohibition against discrimination; exceptions. No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, sexual orientation or gender identity, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, except that: … (http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm)

Existing Filed Bill: Student Non-discrimination Act (all students in primary and secondary schools receiving federal funds; covers bullying a/k/a harrassment).
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/SNDA-house-112/

Proposed in AEB II.  Not in Polis Omnibus. But SNDA is proposed in Polis Omnibus and covers same areas).

Related Existing Filed Bill: Safe Schools Improvement Act (funding for local studies on bullying, including requirement for no-bullying policy in “agencies” receiving funding under this law; but doesn’t appear to create or require no-bullying policies in schools generally)
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/safeschools-house-112/

7. CREDIT.
Title VII of THE EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY ACT
TEXT: 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1691
§ 701. Prohibited discrimination; reasons for adverse action
(a) It shall be unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction–
(1) on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status, or age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract);
(Text: http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/documents/ecoafulltext_5-1-06.php)

Existing Filed Bill: Freedom From Discrimination in Credit Act
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/creditdiscrimination-house-112/

Proposed in AEB & Polis Omnibus Outline.

8. FEDERAL MARRIAGE EQUALITY & DOMA REPEAL.
LIKE LOVING v. VIRGINIA, BUT BY FEDERAL STATUTE
There is no existing federal non-discrimination law governing marriage because for race, the issue was addressed by the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia in 1967. The underlying power used by the Court, however, should enable the Congress to accomplish the same result of non-discrimination based on gender/SO in marriage via a federal non-discrimination law, using any number of legal basis, including the Constitutional provisions of the commerce clause, public welfare, equal protection and liberty. This issue, however, merits expert analysis, but the presumption should be that Congress has the legal power to end marriage discrimination in the states.
It could possibly be this simple: “No state shall deny equal access to marriage under the laws of the state based on the gender of the two individuals seeking to form such union.”

Or: “No state shall deny equal access to marriage under the laws of the state based on the race, color, sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, nation origin, or religion of the two individuals seeking to form such union.”

Fourteenth Amendment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause
Loving v. Virginia: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=388&invol=1
Perry v. Schwarzenegger (CA Prop. 8 Decision): http://documents.nytimes.com/us-district-court-decision-perry-v-schwarzenegger#document/
Romer v. Evans (CO Amendment 2):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romer_v._Evans

No Existing Filed Bills seeking Federal Marriage Equality.
Proposed in AEB II, nor Polis Omnibus Outline.

DOMA Repeal: Section 1738C of 28 U.S.C. and Section 7 of 1 U.S.C. are hereby repealed.

28 U.S.C. 1738C.  No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.

1 U.S.C. Sec. 7. In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word “marriage” means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word “spouse” refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.

(DOMA: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c104:H.R.3396.ENR:).

Proposed in AEB II.

Related Existing Filed Bills: The Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA), which repeals DOMA in part. DOMA repeal does not grant marriage equality in the 50 states as proposed above, but DOMA repeal would need to accompany any federal marriage non-discrimination law.
AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/domarepeal-house-112/

9. IMMIGRATION, DISABILITY & FAMILY LEAVE.
9. A. IMMIGRATION
UNITING AMERICAN FAMILIES ACT (UAFA) (proposed).
Pending marriage equality in all 50 states, UAFA is a stand-alone measure to stop the irreparable harm caused to bi-national relationships torn apart due to marriage discrimination in the states & DOMA. UAFA works as a domestic partnership-type fix in the immigration arena specifically, and should be included in any omnibus bill. UAFA is also included in various Comprehensive Immigration Reform bills.

Existing Filed Bills. UAFA Text: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s112-821.  UAFA is also included in a Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill: S.1258 – Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 201.

AOP Whip Count: http://www.actonprinciples.org/UAFA-senate-112/

Proposed in Polis Omnibus Outline, and AEB II.

9. B. DISABILITY.
THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
These changes remove the references to the terms “transvestism,” “transsexualism” “tranvestite” and “gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairment” that limit their inclusion within the term “disabilities” or “conditions” under the ADA.

(As proposed in the AEB): The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§12101 et seq., and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §706, are amended to repeal discriminatory provisions, as follows:

a. Delete bold/strike through text: 42 U.S.C. §12208 For the purposes of this chapter, the term “disabled” or “disability” shall not apply to an individual solely because that individual is a transvestite.

b. 42 U.S.C. §12211(b)(1). Delete the words “transvestism” and “transsexualism” and the phrase “gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments,” from the definition of “Certain conditions” excluded from coverage under the Act, as follows:

Existing TEXT (proposed deletion bold/strike through): (a) Homosexuality and bisexuality For purposes of the definition of “disability” in section 12102(2) of this title, homosexuality and bisexuality are not impairments and as such are not disabilities under this chapter. (b) Certain conditions Under this chapter, the term “disability” shall not include – (1) transvestism, transsexualism, pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments, or other sexual behavior disorders; (2) compulsive gambling, kleptomania, or pyromania; or (3) psychoactive substance use disorders resulting from current illegal use of drugs.

c. 29 U.S.C. 705 (20) (F) (i). Delete the words “transvestism” and “transsexualism” and the phrase “gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments,” from the list excluding from protection an ‘individual with a disability’ as follows:

Existing TEXT: (proposed deletion bold/strike through): 705 (20) (F) Rights provisions; exclusion of individuals on basis of certain disorders.  For the purposes of sections 791, 793, and 794 of this title, the term “individual with a disability” does not include an individual on the basis of– (i) transvestism, transsexualism, pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments, or other sexual behavior disorders;

No Existing Filed Bills: Proposed in the American Equality Bill (AEB). Not in Polis Omnibus Outline.

9C. FAMILY LEAVE

FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE ACT

Changes to this law are proposed, in the absence of marriage equality, to expand concepts of parent and children to our domestic partnerships and parenthood relationships. If federal marriage equality is not achieved, this is an important alternative.

(As proposed in the AEB) The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §2611, is by adding the following bolded italicized sentences:

29 U.S.C. 2611 (7) Parent
The term “parent” means the biological parent of an employee or an individual who stood in loco parentis to an employee when the employee was a son or daughter. For purposes of this statute, the term “in loco parentis” includes but is not limited to an individual who is a defacto or psychological parent of the child.

(12) Son or daughter
The term “son or daughter” means a biological, adopted, or foster child, a stepchild, a legal ward, or a child of a person standing in loco parentis, a child registered as a “dependent” or similar classification under the employer’s domestic partnership policy, or a child designated by an employee and his or her domestic partner as a “dependent” or similar classification pursuant to a municipal, state or federal domestic partnership registry, who is—

(13) Spouse
The term “spouse” means a husband or wife, as the case may be. For purposes of this statute, the term “spouse” includes a person designated a domestic partner under the employer’s domestic partnership policy, an employee’s civil union partner, a spouse from a domestic or foreign marriage, and a domestic partner registered pursuant to a municipal, state or federal law.

No Existing Filed Bills.   Proposed in the American Equality Bill (AEB) & Polis Omnibus Outline.

10. DEFINITIONS:

The definitions of SO&GI are the same across various pieces of existing and proposed legislation including: the Student Non-Discrimination Act, and Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and proposed American Equality Bill.

(2) GENDER IDENTITY- The term ‘gender identity’ means the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth.

(5) SEXUAL ORIENTATION- The term ‘sexual orientation’ means homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality.

“Sexual Orientation” in the Military Readiness Act:

`(f) Sexual Orientation- In this section, the term `sexual orientation’ means heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality, whether the orientation is real or perceived, and includes statements and consensual sexual conduct that is not otherwise illegal manifesting heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality.’.

“Harassment” in the Student Non-Discrimination Act:
(b) Harassment- For purposes of this Act, discrimination includes, but is not limited to, harassment of a student on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of such student or of a person with whom the student associates or has associated

Other qualifying language from ENDA:

CERTAIN SHARED FACILITIES- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to establish an unlawful employment practice based on actual or perceived gender identity due to the denial of access to shared shower or dressing facilities in which being seen unclothed is unavoidable, provided that the employer provides reasonable access to adequate facilities that are not inconsistent with the employee’s gender identity as established with the employer at the time of employment or upon notification to the employer that the employee has undergone or is undergoing gender transition, whichever is later.

ADDITIONAL FACILITIES NOT REQUIRED- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require the construction of new or additional facilities.

DRESS AND GROOMING STANDARDS- Nothing in this Act shall prohibit an employer from requiring an employee, during the employee’s hours at work, to adhere to reasonable dress or grooming standards not prohibited by other provisions of Federal, State, or local law, provided that the employer permits any employee who has undergone gender transition prior to the time of employment, and any employee who has notified the employer that the employee has undergone or is undergoing gender transition after the time of employment, to adhere to the same dress or grooming standards for the gender to which the employee has transitioned or is transitioning.

Mathew Shepard Hate Crimes Act (Passed).

Covers: gender, sexual orientation, gender identity.
Gender (previously referred to as “sex”), & SO are not defined, that I can find.
“Gender Identity” is defined as “actual or perceived gender-related characteristics”.

International Law & Resolutions

International Resolutions Making it Clear that SO&GI Discrimination violates Human Rights Norms, creating a Clear Duty of signatory countries, including the United States, to outlaw and eradicate such discrimination.

United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution (June 2011).
Organization of American States Resolution (June 2011).

MISCELLANEOUS

Over view of Reports on Harm Caused by LGBT Discrimination & Laws