Sam and crew go over Graham Platner’s win and his interview with Mika Brzezinski Scarborough on Morning Joe. Amoung the jokes about her interview they go over his acceptance speech. I am personally satisfied he has answered all the questions. I love his line “… if you give me the chance I will be a senator for the people who cannot afford to buy a senator”. I am a progressive and a believer in DSA policies. Graham Platner is not the perfect person who is flawless and unlike many his flaws are out in the open, not hidden behind a facade of fake religious politeness. He is a populist. I am not looking for religious leaders in our lawmakers, I am not expecting someone who walked blamelessly through life, that they way only one person did and his name was Jesus. I am looking for someone whose policies help the lower incomes and the public at large, not the privileged few. I am looking for a congress and White House filled with people who do not think elected office is their golden ticket to personal wealth and authority over others. Real people screw up and those that ask and work for a second chance should be given a chance to show they deserve it. In my opinion Platner has and does shown he deserves his forgiveness. Plus people look at Graham’s past are not looking at Collin’s past or even Mika who started dating Joe when he was still married. To me a lot of these people going on about Platner’s past seem to hold him to a different standard than they themselves are held or republican canidates are held. Hugs.
For me it is self harm. The constant pain my body is in and painful memories want me to cause the pain I can control, which releases endorphins, causing temporary easing of the mental torture I feel all the time now. But I don’t, and I won’t. Not now, not this minute, not this hour, not this day, not … as long as I can say not. I promised Randy back in 2014 I wouldn’t start doing it without telling him first. I have held to that promise. Hugs. Scottie
A pair of hearings on Tuesday highlighted the extreme nature of DOJ’s requests — and the speed with which DOJ has moved to try and get the invasive patient data in recent weeks.
The Trump administration’s actions aimed at making it more difficult for transgender minors to receive gender-affirming medical care regardless of state policies allowing or even protecting such care are facing strong pushback. And while the Justice Department has described a “nationwide” investigation into the care, it was those challenging DOJ who prompted hearings on both coasts on Tuesday.
The Justice Department’s efforts to obtain information about patients who received gender-affirming medical care by way of administrative subpoenas and, more recently, grand jury subpoenas are extreme — and lawyers say, unprecedented.
The pair of hearings Tuesday highlighted the extreme nature of DOJ’s requests — and the speed with which DOJ has moved to try and get the invasive patient data in recent weeks after nearly a year since the first requests went out in July 2025.
The administrative subpoenas have been blocked when challenged, leading a set of patients to seek a class-action order quashing the patient-specific requests in all of the administrative subpoenas.
At 10:00 a.m. ET Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Julie Rubin held a hearing related to that request at the Edward A. Garmatz U.S. District Courthouse in Baltimore.
Rubin, a Biden appointee, was one of the judges who had previously quashed the patient-specific requests, as to those who moved to quash the administrative subpoena issued to Children’s National Hospital (headquartered in D.C. but with locations in Maryland as well), finding that the “Subpoena lacks a legitimate purpose.“
The bulk of Rubin’s questions to Rachel Berg from the National Center for LGBTQ Rights on Tuesday related to whether Rubin could certify a class in a motion to quash an administrative subpoena and, if not, how far relief could go.
Ultimately, Berg acknowledged that, if Rubin did not certify a class, relief could only reach those with a connection to Maryland. In their filing, they had noted that “[a]t least two Movants currently reside in Maryland and four families received services from Children’s National Hospital in Maryland.“
That would, however, not accomplish what the litigation is seeking to do — stop DOJ from getting any of the patient-specific information in response to any of the administrative subpoenas. As such, if Rubin denies this request, there likely would be a further effort to accomplish that goal.
At the same time, Rubin pushed DOJ’s Scott Dahlquist on the opposite side nearly as strongly as she’d pushed Berg. When he insisted that the patients were seeking “sweeping, nationwide” relief, Rubin asked how that’s different from any class-action litigation. Dahlqust’s response was, essentially, that you can’t get class relief for an administrative subpoena.
On rebuttal, though, Berg responded that, though the patients’ request to the court might be without a perfect match from past litigation, the reason that is so is because there is no precedent for the Justice Department’s actions here.
Although it is not clear how Rubin will rule, the relevance of the administrative subpoena fight could be taking on less importance in short order. As Law Dork has covered in depth, DOJ’s apparent move to grand jury subpoenas issued in the Northern District of Texas in May is reaching a head — with at least two grand jury subpoenas having initially had a return date of Wednesday, June 10.
Over the past week, patients ofLucile Salter Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford have made efforts to block the grand jury subpoena issued to Packard. After a first attempt to block Packard from turning over the information — in a lawsuit filed only against Packard — was rejected over the weekend, the patients filed an expanded lawsuit on Monday. In that, they added the Justice Department and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche as defendants and asking for class-action relief for all who received gender-affirming medical care as minors in California and, specifically, Packard patients (similar to litigation in New York City). They also filed a request for a temporary restraining order barring DOJ from receiving patient-specific information, given the forthcoming return-date deadline.
At 10:00 a.m. PT Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Casey Pitts held a conference related to that request. Pitts was presiding over the remote hearing from his courtroom at the Robert F. Peckham Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in San Jose.
The hearing before Pitts, another Biden appointee, ultimately, was less adversarial — for now — than the Baltimore hearing.
Late Monday, Pitts had issued a temporary order blocking Packard from turning over any more documents to the government and blocking DOJ from taking any further action to enforce any grand jury subpoenas that would affect the would-be class here while he considered the matter.
Everyone, more or less, was OK with keeping that status while taking up the TRO request on a slightly less rushed timeline.
Although it took a few minutes at the status conference for everyone to agree that everyone was on the same page, ultimately John Wollman, the assistant U.S. attorney from the Northern District of California representing the government at the hearing, while not acknowledging any grand jury subpoena, agreed to push back any Packard subpoena response date to June 25 to allow time for briefing and arguments on the patients’ request.
Although the parties need to submit a briefing schedule to Pitts for how to proceed, the outcome is similar to that reached temporarily as to the grand jury subpoena challenge in New York City, where the next hearing is set for June 22.
In short, the grand jury subpoenas that are known to have been challenged are on hold for now by agreement of the government while the litigation is considered.
Despite that, though, the return date was June 10 on both published grand jury subpoenas, so it is possible that others are out there that have not been challenged and will lead to productions on Wednesday. (Of course, it is also possible there are other challenges that have just flown under the radar.)
Regardless, and as NCLR’s Berg detailed Tuesday in Baltimore, this is an unprecedented, multi-pronged attack on a small handful of children. What’s more, given the way DOJ is going about this, they and their families might not even know that their records might be turned over to the government — or if their provider has even been subpoenaed.
Law Dork will continue to cover this story. If you know about any previously unreported subpoenas, other related DOJ efforts, or other challenges to those efforts, please reach out. Chris Geidner is available on Signal at crg.32 for more secure communications.
I first read about Bayard Rustin in “The Nation” in the late 1990s. His story was both sad and inspirational. Here is some background on an unrecognized star (not that article I read years ago, I’m sorry. I have no access.)
Bayard Rustin (1912–1987) was a human rights activist known for his work during the Civil Rights Movement
Rustin was a key organizer of the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom and was one of Martin Luther King Jr.’s closest advisors, especially on techniques of nonviolent resistance. Rustin was extremely active in the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) and helped to create the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC).
Early in his career, he was arrested for “moral cause” which led to his outing to the public. However, once outed, Rustin was completely open about his sexuality and was never ashamed. Criticism and discrimination over his sexuality led Rustin to have a more background role in the Civil Rights Movement. He never wanted his sexuality to have a negative effect on the Movement, which is often the reason that Rustin’s efforts are not widely known. (snip-MORE)
Bayard Rustin was an American leader in social movements for civil rights, socialism, pacifism and non-violence, and gay rights.
2HKJNR6 Bayard Rustin (1912-1987), American civil rights activist, attending Walter Reuther Press Conference, Warren K. Leffler, US News & World Report Magazine Collection, March 17, 1965
Bayard Rustin was an unsung hero whose indomitable spirit and relentless dedication carved a pivotal path in the American civil rights movement. Despite the shadows cast by prejudice and political adversity, Rustin’s life radiated with a fervent commitment to justice, equality, and nonviolence. His story is one of courage, resilience, and unwavering passion for the principles he held dear.
A Foundation of Activism
Born on March 17, 1912, in West Chester, Pennsylvania, Rustin was nurtured in a household steeped in activism and moral conviction. Raised by his Quaker grandparents, particularly his grandmother, Julia Rustin, a dedicated member of the NAACP, he absorbed the values of equality and social justice from an early age. This upbringing ignited a spark within him that would blaze throughout his lifetime.
Rustin’s early education at Wilberforce University and Cheyney State Teachers College further fueled his activist spirit. Though he did not complete his degree, these institutions were fertile ground for his burgeoning political consciousness. His move to Harlem in 1936 immersed him in the heart of African-American culture and political activism, setting the stage for his life’s work.
The Power of Nonviolence
Rustin’s commitment to nonviolence was both a strategic choice and a deeply held belief. His association with the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), a pacifist organisation, was pivotal. Under the mentorship of A. J. Muste, Rustin honed his skills in civil disobedience and nonviolent resistance, becoming a leading voice in the fight against racial injustice.
In 1947, Rustin co-organised the Journey of Reconciliation, a courageous precursor to the Freedom Rides of the 1960s. This daring initiative aimed to dismantle segregation on interstate buses through direct action. Facing arrests and brutality, Rustin’s unwavering resolve demonstrated the transformative power of nonviolent protest and set a powerful precedent for future civil rights campaigns.
A Strategic Visionary
Rustin’s encounter with Martin Luther King Jr. during the Montgomery Bus Boycott marked a turning point in the civil rights movement. Recognising King’s potential, Rustin became a crucial advisor, infusing the movement with his vast experience and strategic acumen. His efforts were instrumental in the formation of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in 1957, strengthening the infrastructure of the civil rights struggle.
Rustin’s strategic brilliance shone through his emphasis on Gandhian principles of nonviolence. He played a key role in guiding King towards these philosophies, ensuring that nonviolent resistance remained at the heart of the movement. Rustin’s behind-the-scenes influence was a driving force that propelled the civil rights movement forward, even amidst escalating tensions and opposition.
Bayard Rustin was a black Civil Rights activist, a close associate of Martin Luther King, and an advocate of gay and lesbian rights, and a Quaker.
Rustin was born in West Chester, Pennsylvania and was brought up by his grandmother, who had been raised as a Quaker. He himself became a Quaker in 1936, shortly before moving to New York where he lived most of his adult life. He was a pacifist and a primary influence in bringing non-violent resistance into the American Civil Rights Movement, much inspired by Gandhi’s approach in India.
In 1941, he joined the pacifist Fellowship of Reconciliation. He protested against segregation within the armed forces, and worked with the American Friends Service Committee to protect the property of interned Japanese Americans.
Despite his membership of the Society of Friends (one of the so-called ‘Historic Peace Churches’), Rustin was jailed in 1944 for his conscientious objection to cooperating with the draft. While in jail, he organised protests against segregated seating in the dining hall. In a letter to the prison warden, he wrote:
Both morally and practically, segregation is to me a basic injustice. Since I believe it to be so, I must attempt to remove it. There are three ways in which one can deal with an injustice. (a) One can accept it without protest. (b) On can seek to avoid it. (c) One can resist the injustice non-violently. To accept it is to perpetuate it.
After the War, he took part in the Journey of Reconciliation across four southern States, to protest against illegal segregation in inter-state travel. He was arrested, along with his fellow protestors, several times in the course of the journey and in North Carolina was sentenced to thirty days on a chain gang. The protest became a model for future ‘Freedom Rides’.
In 1956, he was asked to advise Martin Luther King on the application of non-violent resistance to the boycott of public transport in Montgomery, Alabama. In August 1963, Rustin had the mammoth task of organising the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom – a rally attended by twenty thousand people that culminated in King’s ‘I have a dream’ speech. In 1968, shortly before King’s assassination, he drafted the ‘Economic Bill of Rights’ which called for – among other things – a meaningful job and a living wage for people of all colours.
Rustin’s concern for Human Rights was never confined to black Americans. In the 1940s and 50s, He supported independence movements in India, Ghana and Nigeria. In the 1970s and 1980s, Rustin became an election and human rights observer in countries like Chile, El Salvador, Grenada, Haiti, Poland, and Zimbabwe. As Vice Chairman of the International Rescue Committee he participated in the international March for Survival on the Thai-Cambodian border and helped raise awareness of the plight of the Vietnamese boat people. He was Co-Chairman of the Citizens Commission on Indochinese Refugees and helped found the National Emergency Coalition for Haitian Refugees.
Rustin was an openly gay man who had once been arrested for public indecency at a time when homosexuality was illegal in all US states. This fact was used against him more than once and contributed to his relatively low profile in the Civil Rights movement. However, in the 1970s and 80s he wrote a number of essays which drew parallels between the black civil rights movement and the gay liberation movement. In 1986, Rustin wrote:
Today, blacks are no longer the litmus paper or the barometer of social change. Blacks are in every segment of society and there are laws that help to protect them from racial discrimination… It is in this sense that gay people are the new barometer for social change… The question of social change should be framed with the most vulnerable group in mind: gay people.
Rustin fell ill during a human rights expedition to Haiti in 1987 and died shortly after from a perforated appendix.
His life was documented in the film Brother Outsider.
His collected writings were published in A Time On Two Crosses.
The Human Rights Campaign has reached a historic high of 4 million members and supporters thanks to people like you. With our rights and freedoms under attack, our job at this moment is not simply to defend ourselves. We must rewrite what it means to be free in America. Because freedom must belong to all of us.
So this Pride Month, as we head into marking this country’s 250th birthday, the LGBTQ+ community and allies are showing up loud and proud — we’re reclaiming this country and its freedoms as our own. We say with our full chest: Pride is Patriotism.
Pride is Powerful
Real change doesn’t come from the top down — it rises from the streets, from our communities, and from people like you. With 4 million voices already united under the Human Rights Campaign, this movement is fierce, fearless, and growing. Together, we can ensure that our voices are heard and our rights are protected.
At a military retirement ceremony unlike any other in modern American history, five transgender service members stood before their families, colleagues and country to mark the end of careers defined by excellence, leadership and sacrifice. They were not retiring because they failed to meet the standard. They were retiring because the standard was changed to exclude them.
“Trans servicemembers … are the frontline canaries in the coal mine of our democracy as to who can be seen as not just American, but among the best that America has to offer,” said Shawn Skelly, former assistant secretary of Defense for Readiness and member of HRC’s Board of Directors.
In addition to providing the official welcome on behalf of the HRC Foundation, Cmdr. Skelly provided a powerful keynote during the morning session and panel focused on military benefits and the future of service for our communities.
HRC’s Equality Center proudly hosted this event on Jan. 8, 2026, to officially retire Col. Bree Fram, Cmdr. Blake Dremann, Lt. Col. Erin Krizek, Chief Petty Officer Jaida McGuire and Sgt. 1st Class Cathrine Schmid. Together, they represent more than a century of service across the Armed Forces. These heroes were also a proxy for the countless more whose stories we have not yet heard but whose service has helped shape a safer, stronger more honorable military and nation.
Photo Credit: Laura Hatcher Photography
“This ceremony is unprecedented,” said retired Maj. Gen. Tammy Smith, who served as master of ceremonies. “Not because their careers fell short in any way, but because they shined so brightly in a military that cast them aside as unworthy.”
As former Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall observed, what stood out to him was “how similar these read to those of all other retirees, and to others still serving.”
The difference, he noted, is that this group was not allowed to continue wearing the uniform. “It is a huge injustice, and an enormous loss to our nation.”
The ceremony was presided over by retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal, whose remarks were as direct as his reputation for leadership.
“This isn’t complicated,” McChrystal said. “We’ve got to leverage every bit of talent that this nation has.” Excluding people who meet every standard weakens readiness and undermines the values the military is meant to defend, he said. (snip-MORE; each retiree gets to share, too)
Dan McClellan explains why saying the bible is against homosexuality is wrong. The status of the male as the top of the hierarchy was of primary concern. Women were of a lower status than men. For a man to penetrate caused his status to fall to that of a woman. That was the sin of same sex acts in their society. So men were told not to penetrate other men as that lowered them to the position of women in their society. He points out that they felt that a man who wanted to be penetrated was thought to have a mental illness. He points out how the people of that time were not worried about female same sex acts because they did not lower anyone status because no penis was involved and no male was emasculated. McClellan points out that the bible really was only concerned with one side of the same gender act so it was not homosexuality that it condemned but the lowering of a male’s top position in society that was the issue. I have watched and posted a lot of his videos on sexuality in the bible and those who use the bible as a club to bash LGBTQ+ people with. He is a scholar so he gets into the weeds of the real meanings of the words that make up the text. He can be difficult to follow sometimes because of that. He also used the example of slavery in the bible and how it was used to justify owning another person as property. It is an interesting video that gets easier to understand towards the end as he wraps it all together and warns those who use the bible in this manner that they are causing a lot of harm to those who do not believe or think as they do on same sex acts. Hugs
When there’s a decent though old Democrat in the race. I remember when Trent Lott resigned after what he said about how things would have been better under President Thurmond. IMEO, Moulton should drop out now, rather than wreck the race and elect a Republican. When there is oppo information, people should heed it before the primary
After Representative Seth Moulton’s transphobic comments in 2024, he’s had a rocky relationship with his LGBTQ constituents. So on June 6, when he and a contingent of his supporters marched in the Boston Pride parade, he received a classic Massachusetts reception: direct confrontation.
Multiplevideos circulating on social media show the Congressman being booed along the parade route as he otherwise flashed a smile and waved to constituents. The Democrat is retiring from Massachusetts’ sixth congressional district to run for Senate, challenging iencumbent and reliable trans ally Senator Ed Markey. Moulton drew ire after he called transgender girls “male,” legitimized GOP narratives about trans athletes, and then doubled down on it, griping about identity politics as queer Americans faced increasing political violence.
(snip-embedded Blue Sky; click the title above to go see)
Parade-goers called out Moulton, as seen in a video posted to Bluesky. Aidan Kohn-Murphy, a 22-year-old recent Harvard graduate and progressive content creator, who told Erin in the Morning he took that video, said there was a large group booing Moulton all along the parade route. Detractors can be heard yelling “Transphobe!” and “Trans lives matter!” In another clip posted to Reddit, Bostonians shouted, “Shame on you!”
Moulton’s campaign office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the incident.
Kohn-Murphy said he was moved to voice his discontent due to Moulton’s repeated comments belittling the trans community and scapegoating trans youth over Democrats’ loss in the 2024 election. “There’s no queer community without trans people,” Kohn-Murphy said. “Trans people have constantly led the way in our movement and in the path towards queer liberation.”
Moulton apparently doesn’t quite see it that way. “Democrats spend way too much time trying not to offend anyone rather than being brutally honest about the challenges many Americans face,” Moulton told The New York Times in November 2024. “I have two little girls. I don’t want them getting run over by a male or formerly male athlete. But as a Democrat, I’m supposed to be afraid to say that.”
There is zero evidence to suggest that including transgender girls in women’s sports leads to an increase in athletics-related injuries. LGBTQ community leaders were swift to denounce Moulton’s assertions. “Referring to transgender athletes as ‘male or formerly male,’ the Congressman’s remarks were both harmful and factually inaccurate,” a press release from Mass Equality, a state LGBTQ rights organization, said. “These statements contribute to the ongoing stigmatization of transgender people.”
Other Democrats had also called out his behavior at the time. A top aide of his resigned. Hundreds gathered outside his office in protest. Governor Maura Healey and Rep. Ayanna Pressley condemned his position. “It’s important in this moment that we not pick on particularly vulnerable children,” Healey told reporters. “That’s what I’ve been disappointed in seeing.”
Moulton inflamed the situation further in his comments to WGBH, where he seemed to call trans inclusion “weird.”
“I mean, here we are accusing Republicans of being weird, and we’re the ones who are suddenly requiring people to put pronouns in their email signatures,” Moulton said.
“I mean, that’s kind of weird, to be honest. You know, we went through the whole gay rights movement. We went through the whole Civil Rights Movement. We never had to say, you know, ‘Seth Moulton: Straight’ or ‘Seth Moulton: White.’ And all of a sudden, we have to change all our values to meet the needs or demands of one very small minority group.”
Parade attendee Monica Reina-Gonzalez simply wasn’t having it. “You can’t come here and act like you support our community when you’re blaming our kids for losing the election,” Reina-Gonzalez told The Boston Globe.
In a statement from March 2025, Moulton seemingly tried to cool the temperature. “Transgender individuals, in particular, have faced significant adversity, experiencing discrimination, hate crimes, attempts to limit bodily autonomy, and worsened mental health as a result,” he wrote. He further cited his own voting record in favor of protecting transgender Americans, including some trans athletes.
For example, Moulton did indeed cosponsor the Equality Act, which would explicitly include LGBTQ+ people as a protected class under the Civil Rights Act. He also rejected Congress’ proposed Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act under the Trump regime. “Younger kids who simply want to play recreational sports and build camaraderie like everybody else should not be targeted by the federal government,” Moulton wrote.
At the same time, he lamented that “too many Democrats are afraid that they will be attacked for even entertaining meaningful dialogue and debate around contentious issues” like gendered athlete policies. But as transgender lawmakers find themselves silenced in their respective governing bodies, bombarded with violent threats and rhetoric, and banned from using the bathroom in their place of work by the very colleagues they must legislate alongside, many found his self-proclaimed martyrdom superficial.
“He’s a politician who does not have any concrete value system,” Kohn-Murphy said. “I think if he’s willing to throw some of the most vulnerable in our community under the bus, then he cannot be trusted.”
It’s the second time Moulton has been booed at a progressive event; he was met with jeers at a No Kings rally this past October.
Earlier today, Bay State Stonewall Democrats—a contingent of LGBT Democratic voters in the state—endorsed Moulton’s opponent, Senator Ed Markey, for the September primaries.
“From the Transgender Bill of Rights to the Transgender Health Care Access Act to the Elder Pride Act, he has spent decades fighting to protect LGBTQ+ lives,” a post from the organization said of Markey.
“And when things got tough politically, he didn’t throw trans people under the bus to score points with skeptical voters,” the endorsement continued. “At a moment when our rights are under serious attack, the Bay State Stonewall Democrats stand with the candidate who stood up for us and won’t sell us out for political expediency.”
The religious right in the US salivates over being able to do this here in the US. The goal is to enshrine being straight and cis into law so it makes being LGBTQ+ illegal. These people want to eradicate the entire LGBTQ+ community. They want desperately to return to a time when heteronormaty was assumed the only correct and natural way to present sexual attraction and gender. Why these people are so butt hurt over other people’s sexual attractions and gender feelings makes no sense. Arre straight men angry that lesbians don’t want to have sex with them? Are religious straight men terrified that they find the woman attractive only to learn she is trans which makes them hornier? And as always attacks on the LGBTQ+ follow the same script which is that LGBTQ+ are a threat to children, society, and family values. Family values mean what? That same sex people don’t have accidental pregnancies? What is not family about same gender couples? Oh right it doesn’t look like adam and eve to the hateful religious groups and it doesn’t look like mommy and daddy to the bigots. Hugs
On Wednesday, 11 members of the Turkish rights group Young LGBTI+ were tried over charges of “obscenity” and “violating the protection of the family,” their lawyer told Agence France-Presse.
The defendants face three years in prison for violating an article in the Turkish constitution that prosecutors say undermines “family values.” Among the activists’ offenses: posting images to social media that show same-sex couples kissing, a display deemed “obscene” by the government.
The trial in the western city of Izmir could result in prison time for the defendants and the suspension of their civil rights. It coincides with an appeal against another court ruling issued in December ordering Young LGBTI+’s dissolution based on the same charges.
While homosexuality isn’t illegal in Turkey as it is in most neighboring Muslim-majority countries, authoritarian President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has made the LGBTQ+ community a frequent target when it suits him. He blames Turkey’s low birthrate in part on gay people.
“This trial arises from a policy of excluding LGBT+ people from the public sphere,” said Kerem Dikmen, who is the Young LGBTI+ group’s lawyer and also a defendant in the case.
“This is not about obscenity. Activities that are perfectly legitimate, legal and in line with the Constitution are being criminalized. It is a form of dehumanization,” he said.
Turkey’s tenuous ties to Europe once moderated the country’s official treatment of LGBTQ+ Turks, but with Erdogan’s rise, the country’s integration with the West stalled. Talks on EU membership, first proposed in 1999, effectively ended in 2016 over European concerns on human rights, migration issues, and Erdogan’s democratic backsliding.
“Legislators could be considering the criminalization of any expression of LGBTI identities, consensual same-sex sexual activity, and access to vital gender-affirming healthcare,” Dinushika Dissanayake, Amnesty’s Deputy Director for Europe, said at the time. “Under these proposals, people could face jail terms based on gender stereotypes, how they present themselves, and who they chose to be in a relationship with.”
“These proposals present a grave threat to the rights of LGBTI people and those who advocate for LGBTI rights, and they must never see the light of day,” he warned.
While the legislation was withdrawn in November, the new case is testing the limits of current law to the same ends.
“We will not give up defending human rights,” said Young LGBTI+’s lawyer. “But they are trying to send a message to society through us.”
Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.
Shutterstock
Scottie's Playtime 