Although it’s positive news that more people feel able to select their correct gender identity when trying to find a date, the company’s attempts to include the trans community have recently been criticised as “virtue signalling”.
Trans people told PinkNews that Tinder condones “discrimination” against trans people using the app, partly because of poor customer support for trans people who have been banned.
Trans people said that they had been banned two hours after changing their gender on the app to trans, and after being invasively questioned by cis men about their genitals – and all the trans people PinkNews spoke to knew multiple other trans people who’d been banned, too.
In September 2019, Hustlers star Trace Lysette was abruptly banned. And Peppermint, from RuPaul’s Drag Race, also reported being banned in May 2019.
A Tinder spokesperson told PinkNews in a statement: “Tinder has been at the forefront of pioneering inclusive features that ensure our members can be their authentic selves on our platform.
“We recognise the transgender community faces challenges on Tinder, including being unfairly reported by potential matches more often than our cisgender members.
“This is a multifaceted, complex issue and we are working to continuously improve their experience.”
Acclaimed cartoonist Howard Cruse, 75, has died. Cruse died on November 26, 2019, due to cancer. He is survived by his husband Eddie Sedarbaum and his daughter Kimberly Kolze Venter.
Born in Springfield, Alabama in 1944, Cruse was an avid fan of newspaper cartoons. He spent his adolescence constantly doodling, in an effort to reproduce the magic he found in his favorite “funny papers.” He attended Birmingham-Southern College in the 1960s, where he studied drama. His time studying the theater arts never hampered his desire to draw cartoons. Throughout college, he created humorous illustrations for both his school newspaper and several noted national periodicals.
After college, Cruse worked in television at a local Alabama TV station, both in production and art direction, where he often used his graphic art skills to create promotional materials for locally produced shows. Cruse also had a prominent side job creating cartoons for the comics section of the Birmingham Post-Herald.
Cruse moved to New York City in the 1970s, where he hit his creative stride. He immersed himself in the underground comic book scene, that while often transgressive was not readily queer. Using some of the underground comics’ boundary breaking content as an inspiration, but not as a thematic guidepost, Cruse created work that was sexually forthright, and yet filled with humanity, humor, and insight. In the 1980s, he edited Gay Comix, a groundbreaking comic series that centered gay and lesbian cartoonists, and he created the topical Wendell series for The Advocate. In the 1990s, he reached both a critical and artistic high point with the publication of his emotionally complex Stuck Rubber Baby.
Thanks to Cruse’s big-hearted art, readers have received an expansive vision of gay life in the latter half of the 20th century.
The Stonewall riots of 1969 are often cited as the moment that gave rise to the modern LGBT+ rights movement. It was a seminal moment for LGBT+ people in the United States – but it wasn’t the first time gay people had protested against mistreatment.
Three years before the Stonewall riots kicked off, gay people in cities across the United States gathered to protest against their exclusion from the armed forces. The protests had been a long time coming. The US armed forces introduced a policy during World War II which excluded gay people from serving. They were often discharged by doctors for displaying “homosexual tendencies.”
“The discharge policy increased fear, reinforced hostility and prejudice, encouraged scapegoating and witch hunting, and helped to solidify gay men and women into a political movement against the military’s exclusion of homosexuals,” writes Alan Berube in Coming Out Under Fire.
The protests of 1966 came at a politically charged moment in time. As the Vietnam War gained steam, many gay people were starting to ask the question: why should they want to serve in the armed forces in the first place? The fight for inclusion had started to be seen as “old fashioned” by the “baby-boom generation of gay activists” who were questioning why gay people would want to serve in the face of war, according to Berube.
A ‘loose confederation’ of gay groups was formed to protest the armed forces’ exclusionary policies.
Despite reservations from some sections of the community, there was ample support for protests against the armed forces’ exclusionary policies. The idea of gay people mobilising was first conceived at the National Planning Conference of Homosexual Organizations in Kansas City. More than 40 gay activists attended the meeting and discussed how they could improve the standing of gay people in America. Out of this emerged the Committee to Fight Exclusion of Homosexuals from the Military, a “loose confederation” of homosexual groups across the US. They came up with a plan to launch the biggest ever gay demonstration the world had seen.
The government’s categoric rejection of all persons it knows to be homosexual is un-American and based on ignorance and superstition.
On May 21 that year, gay people gathered and protested against discriminatory military policies in Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Washington D.C. The protest on Armed Forces Day was “the largest group of homosexual protestors” gathered up until that point in the United States, Josh Sides writes in Erotic City: Sexual Revolutions and the Making of Modern San Francisco.
Gay activists at the protests did not shy away from speaking out about their exclusion from public life. Activist Don Slater was asked by a Newsweek reporter why they were protesting, according to a contemporary report in Tangentsmagazine.
“Who wants to be drafted? Surely not the homosexual,” Slater replied. “But the government’s categoric rejection of all persons it knows to be homosexual is un-American and based on ignorance and superstition. Homosexuals are asking for equal rights and benefits from their country. At the same time they recognize their equal duties and responsibilities.”
Meanwhile, Cecil Williams addressed the crowd at the San Francisco demonstration, and said: “There is a homosexual revolution here and across the land. We protest against the Armed Forces’ policy of discharging ‘discovered’ homophiles under less than honorable conditions.”
Taking part in protests in 1966 was ‘a daring adventure’ for LGBT+ people.
The protests did not come without risk for the gay people taking part. Writing in a letter at the time, Del Martin – one of the founders of the protests – wrote: “This is quite a daring adventure for us. It is not like any other civil rights demonstration – having no popular support and being somewhat hazardous, if not disastrous, to the individual who reveals himself.”
While the protest did not encourage the military to overturn its discriminatory policy, it did raise the profile of gay people significantly. Media outlets across the country covered the protests. They were picked up by newspapers such as the San Francisco Chronicle, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and Newsweek. While not all the coverage was positive – the San Francisco Chronicle ran the story with the headline “Deviates Demand the Right to Serve” – it gave gay people a platform they had previously not had access to.
Bob Ross, secretary of the Tavern Guild, wrote that the public response to the protests was “favourable.”
“This was the communitys [sic] first try at demonstrating nationwide, and we understand that reaction was quite favourable across the country… we must move forward now, there can be no turning back.”
It is now more than 50 years since the protests took place – but that doesn’t mean the battle is over. In 1994, the Clinton administration introduced the infamous “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, which encouraged gay people to stay in the closet while serving in the military. That policy was finally repealed in 2011.
Furthermore, a longstanding ban on trans people serving in the military was lifted by the Obama administration in 2016. However, current US President Donald Trump quickly reversed that decision, and reintroduced the ban.
The legacy of those activists who fought for their inclusion in the armed forces in 1966 lives on because the fight is not yet won for LGBT+ people.
One of Chicago’s oldest churches will soon be transformed into one of the only holistic, queer-friendly centres for the LGBT homeless at-risk youth in the city.
The Black Methodist for Church Renewal has stood in the heart of Chicago’s South Side since 1926. The 12,000-square-foot space remained empty for years after the congregation moved to a new venue, with the site’s owners refusing to sell it until they found a worthy buyer.
It’s now home to the LYTE Collective, a social organisation dedicated to helping the more than 16,000 homeless youth in the city. Around 30 percent of Chicagoans aged between 15 and 24 live below the poverty line, with the bulk of them living on the South and West sides.
“There are very few spaces for young people across the city already, and for LGBTQ youth in particular, and we wanted to plant the flag and say that this is where everyone’s welcome,” founding member Carl Wiley told Block Club Chicago.
“We’re all going to respect each other in here, and we’re all going to figure out what our next steps are in terms of housing, employment, therapy.”
When the centre opens in summer 2020, young LGBT homeless people will be able to access a music studio, an art studio, a gym, computer lab, performance stage, teaching kitchen, co-working space, an on-site clinic and 250 storage units.
“It’s not enough to just give them a place to hang out,” Wiley said. “They need something to do, someone to talk to. We wanted to provide them a space where they could explore the things they were interested in.”
Construction began several weeks ago and neighbours have pitched in to help with the project. Jerome Davis, who lives across the street, watched the building deteriorate for decades but has now come out of retirement to help “keep the neighbourhood looking good.”
“God gave me this building to take care of. It may not be mine, but it will be beautiful,” he said.
The LYTE Collective has already raised $2 million to cover renovations, but is still $340,000 short of their total goal. Those interested in supporting the project can donate here.
Newly introduced legislation in the U.S. House backed by the Mormon Church seeks to strike a middle ground on LGBT rights and religious freedom in federal civil rights law, although major proponents of each refuse to support the legislation.
Introduced by Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) on Friday, the Fairness for All Act would strike balance between LGBT rights and religious freedom in way proponents say would protect First Amendment rights. That way, however, permits anti-LGBT discrimination from religious institutions and small-business wedding vendors.
“Throughout history, there are time when principles come into conflicts, and often they are conflicting good principles, both of them with equal value,” Stewart said at Capitol Hill news conference Friday.
“The job we have before us in our society today is a good example of that, where we have the principle of non-discrimination, that every American should be treated fairly and with respect and with dignity, and at the same time, the sincerely held belief that religious faith and principles also matter, and how do we reconcile those two conflicting principles,” Stewart added. “This is what we are trying to do with this legislation.”
The Fairness for All Act is seen as an alternative to the Equality Act, legislation approved by the House in May under the Democratic majority — with five Republican votes. The Equality Act would make anti-LGBT discrimination a form of sex discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and clarify the Religious Freedom Restoration Act can’t be a justification for discrimination.
Much like the Equality Act, the Fairness for All Act would make anti-LGBT discrimination against federal law, but it would also institute a accommodation for institutions like religious organization and small-business wedding vendors.
The Fairness for All Act would prohibit anti-LGBT discrimination in employment, housing, jury selection, credit, federal programs and public accommodations, but do so without defining anti-LGBT discrimination as sex discrimination. The bill would also expand the definition of public accommodations beyond the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But in contrast to the Equality Act, the Fairness for All Act would preserve Religious Freedom Restoration Act and protect the tax-exempt status of religious colleges and universities that oppose same-sex marriage, such as Brigham Young University, Bethel University and Catholic University.
The Fairness for All Act would also extend protections to small business whose owners refuse to provide services to same-sex weddings based on religious objections. Among them is Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who gained notoriety when his reached the Supreme Court and justices ruled narrowly in his favor based on the facts of the case.
The measure would prohibit anti-LGBT discrimination at “any store, shopping center or online retailer or provider of online services that has 15 or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year,” but states the threshold doesn’t apply to claims of discrimination based on race, color or national origin or the small business wedding vendors excluded under the measure.
Similarly, the measure says “a property owned or operated primarily for noncommercial purposes by a non-profit religious corporation that holds itself out to the public as substantially religious, has as its stated purpose in its organic documents that it is religious, and is substantially religious in its current operations” is not a public accommodation under the legislation.
Lastly, the Fairness for All Act purports to protect religiously affiliated adoption agencies “so they can continue to serve vulnerable children and willing couples, while at the same time ensuring the ability of LGBT persons to adopt and foster children too.”
Unlike the Equality Act, the Fairness for All Act also makes clear access to abortion services aren’t protected, but stipulates the measure shouldn’t be construed to impose a penalty on women who have had an abortion or seek abortion-related services.
Among the proponents of the Fairness for All Act is the Church of Latter-day Saint and Seventh-Day Adventist Church, which expressed support for the legislation in a statement Friday.
Shirley Hoogstra, president of Council for Christian Colleges & Universities, spoke out in favor of the legislation at the Capitol Hill news conference.
“This coalition represents civic pluralism at its best,” Hoogstra said. “We want a society where people with deep differences can live alongside each other with respect and understanding.”
But the nation’s leading advocacy group for LGBTQ rights says the Fairness for All Act doesn’t go far enough, and an anti-LGBT legal firm that purports to protect religious freedom also doesn’t support the legislation.
Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said he “strongly oppose[s]” the Fairness for All Act because it sells LGBTQ people short and erodes existing protections under federal civil rights law.
“The so-called Fairness for All Act is an unacceptable, partisan vehicle that erodes existing civil rights protections based on race, sex and religion, while sanctioning discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people,” David said. “For LGBTQ people living at the intersection of multiple marginalized identities, this bill is a double whammy of dangerous rollbacks and discriminatory carve-outs. This bill is both wrong and harmful, and we strongly oppose it.”
David said the right path for advancing LGBTQ rights is the Equality Act, which he said is necessary because “LGBTQ people deserve full federal equality, period.”
“The Equality Act, on the other hand, has already passed through the House of Representatives with a bipartisan majority, the support of more than 260 leading companies and more than 500 civil rights, religious, medical and social welfare organizations, and is our movement — and, most importantly, our community’s — top legislative priority,” David said.
A spokesperson for Alliance Defending Freedom, the anti-LGBT legal firm that has represented Masterpiece Cakeshop and schools seeking to deny transgender kids access to bathroom consistent with their gender identity, referred to the Washington Blade to a 2018 statement from the organization against the Fairness for All Act Act.
“Every person should be treated with dignity and respect,” said ADF Senior Vice President of U.S. Legal Division Kristen Waggoner. “Unfortunately, sexual orientation and gender identity laws like the so-called ‘Fairness for All’ proposal undermine both fairness and freedom. This proposal is a SOGI law under different branding, with special — and likely temporary— exemptions that protect only a favored few.
A chief proponent of the Fairness for All Act, however, is the American Unity Fund, a pro-LGBTQ Republican organization backed by philanthropist and GOP donor Paul Singer.
Tyler Deaton, senior adviser to the American Unity Fund, said his organization supports the Equality Act, but prefers the Fairness for All Act to prohibit anti-LGBT discrimination.
“We have to have black letter laws on the books that can make it explicit when we’re protected and when we’re not,” Deaton said. “This is hard thing from me to say as a gay guy. There are going to be times that there are religious organizations that are going to have the freedom to refuse to serve me or employ me.”
Deaton said the Human Rights Campaign’s opposition to the Fairness for All Act was “disheartening,” especially the assertion it would undermine existing protections based on race, sex and national origin.
“I think that the statement exaggerates impacts that the bill would have on existing civil rights,” Deaton said. “And I want to be clear on this point, which is that Fairness for All does not touch, or erode, or diminish any civil rights that are on the books today, and in fact, it is biggest expansion of civil rights since the passage in 1964 of the Civil Rights Act, and that’s similar to the Equality Act.”
Another supporter of the legislation is Republican LGBT ally Margaret Hoover, who voiced support for the measure in an interview last month with the Los Angeles Blade and at the Capitol Hill news conference.
“We know that we expect that this bill will be met with criticism from both sides of the aisle,” Hoover said. “Compromise is never easy, but it is our view that LGBTQ Americans cannot afford to wait a single day longer.”
Just about every LGBTQ advocate pushing for the Equality Act came out against the Fairness for All Act, including Justin Nelson, president of the National LGBTQ Chamber of Commerce.
“NGLCC reaffirms it support for the Equality Act, and cannot support ant legislation containing loopholes designed to further keep tax-paying, law-abiding LGBT citizens from achieving success and safety in their own country,” Nelson said.
But there was some openness among LGBTQ advocates. Striking a welcoming chord on the Fairness for All Act was Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
“The introduction of this historic bill marks the first time that conservative religious organizations and leaders have supported comprehensive federal protections for LGBTQ people,” Minter said. “While the details of the bill require more careful consideration, it marks an important milestone in the growing national support for the equality and dignity of LGBTQ people.”
The Fairness for All Act is introduced as the U.S. Supreme Court is considering litigation that would clarify whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans discrimination on the basis of sex in employment, also applies to cases of anti-LGBT discrimination.
If the court rules in favor of LGBT workers, it could have far reaching implications and make federal legislation against anti-LGBT discrimination moot in employment, housing and education (although a legislative change would still be necessary to ban anti-LGBT bias in public accommodations and federal programs). If the court rules against LGBT workers, they would have no protections under federal law, and a legislative fix would be all the more needed.
Arguably the very introduction of the Fairness for All Act bolsters the case Congress didn’t intent to include LGBTQ people when it passed the Civil Rights of 1964, but Deaton denied that was case, adding that line has already been crossed with the Equality Act.
“I think that we all know that regardless of what the Supreme Court decides in the spring, we’re still going to need a federal law that either codifies that decision or rebukes that,” Deaton said. “I mean, if the Supreme Court decides that sex should be interpreted narrowly, then it’s all the more reason we need this bill now.”
The Fairness for All Act will be a tough sell in the House, which addressed the issue of expanding LGBT non-discrimination protections by passing the Equality Act. In the Senate, companion hasn’t even yet been introduced.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) signaled she “strongly opposes” the legislation via comments from her spokesperson Drew Hammill.
“Speaker Pelosi strongly opposes this legislation,” Hammill said. “It represents a step backward in many respects and is a partisan effort to that would lead to much more discrimination in our country not less.”
The solution for enacting LGBT non-discrimination protections under federal law, Hammill said, would be for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to bring up the Equality Act.
“LGBTQ Americans deserve nothing short of full equality,” Hammill said. “House Democrats will continue to call on Senator McConnell to pass the Equality Act.”
Then there’s President Trump. Asked whether he spoken with the White House about the Fairness for All Act, Deaton declined to discuss conversations.
The Trump administration, through White House Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere, signaled an openness to the Fairness for All Act when asked by the Washington Blade about the legislation.
“President Trump has protected human dignity, fought for inclusion, promoted LGBTQ Americans and strongly protected religious freedom for everyone while in office,” Deere said. “The White House looks forward to reviewing the legislation.”
Utility giant Pacific Gas and Electric announced a $13.5 billion settlement agreement to resolve all claims associated with several Northern California wildfires that killed dozens of people and destroyed thousands of businesses and homes. The wildfires have been tied to the company’s equipment.
“We want to help our customers, our neighbors and our friends in those impacted areas recover and rebuild after these tragic wildfires,” said PG&E Corp. CEO and President Bill Johnson in a statement released late Friday.
The settlement fund, if accepted by a bankruptcy judge, will go to victims who lost loved ones and/or property, as well as government agencies and attorneys who have pressed the claims.
Saturday December 21 @ 7:30 pm. Teresa Tudury & Friends at Occidental Center for the Arts. Direct from her current Las Cruces, New Mexico home, Sonoma County’s favorite singer- songwriter and musical comedienne returns to her former Occidental digs for the ‘holidaze’ to gift us with her own brand of madcap musical magic ; along with some well known musical friends! Doug Jayne of KRCB will be the MC. $20 Adv/ $25 at door. Fine refreshments. Art Gallery open. Wheelchair accessible. www.occidentalcenterforthearts.org. 3850 Doris Murphy Ct. Occidental, CA. 95465
Every holiday season traditional and streaming networks create a ton of holiday romantic comedies but they consistently fail to create meaningful stories from the queer perspective.
Written by Kathryn Trammell, directed by Christin Baker, “Season of Love” is a lighthearted rom-com featuring a large ensemble cast of diverse women and their connected love lives during the hectic holiday period just before Christmas through the New Year who discover love truly is the best gift of all.
The movie brings together some fan favorites including actresses from classic LGBTQ films and current television shows including Dominique Provost-Chalkley (“Wynonna Earp”, “Avengers: Age of Ultron”), Jessica Clark (“True Blood”, “A Perfect Ending”), Emily Goss (“Snapshots”), Laur Allen (“Young and the Restless”), Janelle Marie and Sandra Mae Frank (“Deaf West’s Spring Awakening”, “Daybreak”).
Decrying the lack of LGBTQ+ characters and more specifically LGBTQ+ female leads in holiday movies, Tello Films and DASH Productions are proud and excited to be breaking grounds and releasing the first ever Holiday romantic comedy for LGBTQ+ women, Season of Love this December.
“We talk a lot today about diversity on screen but it’s also important to talk about diversity behind the camera. Season of Love has a queer female writer, director and producers that shape the voice of the film and it rings so true to a queer woman’s experience because we have queer women all over this cast and crew. It’s a delight to be part of that,” said Goss.
The Pride LA spoke with Baker about her experience creating the ultimate queer holiday movie. Check it out:
In one sentence, what is Season of Love?
Season of Love is the holiday RomCom that you’ve been waiting for!
Can you elaborate more?
The producing team of Season of Love (Ashley Arnold and Danielle Jablonski) was inspired last holiday season because there wasn’t one Holiday movie that had a queer lady storyline. Ashley said that it was time that we did something about it and came up with the idea to do a call for holiday RomComs. We launched it during the holidays in 2018 and now here we are a year later releasing the first Queer Lady Holiday RomCom. Written by Katheryn Trammell it has a “Love Actually” vibe with 3 interconnected storylines with their own level of cuteness and all the holiday feels and magic.
What interested you in directing the film?
I love directing, I love working with actors so that is my happy place. It only added to the joy that this project was so well written and it was the chance to direct something that I knew I would want to watch and the community would want to watch.
What makes the movie unique?
Season of Love is the first specifically queer women-centric holiday feature.
Of course there have been plenty of others with main and supporting queer characters but never one film that had a 100% LGBTQ storyline.
There have been really great Queer Holiday movies but the different love stories in this one is one of the most fun and unique aspects of this movie. I think people will find a storyline that really speaks to them. A couple that they can relate to, which is so fun.
Can you comment on LGBTQ+ representation on screen?
LGBTQ+ representation is really improving a lot on screen which is fantastic. But despite there being over 40 holiday romantic comedies scheduled to come out this holiday season alone there has still never been one that focuses on LGBTQ+ women. So we decided to change that!
Our film features six diverse female characters. Many of the actors identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community as well as the writer, director, producers and many others behind the camera identifying as queer women. We also believe that it’s important to have diversity in casting and are so proud that all three of our main couples are interracial and that one of our lead characters is also deaf. We’ve tried to make this film authentic to the queer experience, where the characters just are who they are and love who they love. While the majority of LGBTQ films feature coming out stories or stories of struggle or stories that rely on the stereotypes of their sexuality, this movie doesn’t. It’s not about coming out, or dealing with homophobia. It’s truly a fun, romantic comedy with a happy ending for our community. As one of our actors, Jessica Clark says, “This is our ‘Love Actually’.”
What was your favorite scene to direct? Why?
Oh, that’s such a tough question! I can’t pick just one… I loved directing a scene where our character Iris is drunk after her husband leaves her at the alter. Emily Goss played it spot on and Jessica and Janelle were so fun watching and trying to help this train wreck friend. Anytime Jessica Clark had to drop something, she plays a clutz really well, which you’d NEVER guess but she’s so good at it! I never had to say “that looked fake” because she sold it every time. There is an adorable scene where Janey sings to Sue and Janelle and Dominique was just so cute. They played off of each other so well and it’s a very sweet scene.
Why should people watch this?
Because Love. It’s a feel-good, fun, love story and we can really use that right now, I think.
Our hope is that it becomes a classic holiday movie staple for our community.
The film is now available online for pre-sale and will be available for rent and/or purchase on December 1, 2019
California earned top marks in Equality California’s recently released annual state legislative scorecard for 2019
Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ civil rights organization, demonstrating support in the California Legislature for LGBTQ civil rights and social justice. Sixty-one of the 80 members — including two Republicans — received perfect scores in the Assembly. Twenty-six out of 40 senators earned perfect marks, too. Scores were based on six floor votes and a committee vote in the Assembly, and eleven floor votes in the Senate.
Governor Gavin Newsom also scored 100 percent in his first year in office. He signed all five bills sponsored by Equality California that reached his desk. Notably, this included historic legislation authored by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblymember Todd Gloria (D-San Diego) to allow pharmacists to furnish life-saving HIV prevention medication without a doctor’s prescription. The bill, SB159, will take effect January 1, 2020.
“While the Trump-Pence Administration launches new anti-LGBTQ attacks on a near-daily basis, we’re continuing to work with our partners in the legislature and Governor Newsom to make California a beacon of hope to LGBTQ people around the world,” Equality California Executive Director Rick Zbur said in a press statement. “Civil rights and social justice are nonpartisan and nonnegotiable in California, and voters reward pro-equality legislators every two years for their support. President Trump and Senator Mitch ‘Grim Reaper’ McConnell should take note.”
Pamela Karlan, a Stanford Law School professor and self-described “snarky bisexual”, stole the show at Donald Trump’s impeachment hearing with her scathing and quick-witted put-downs.
Karlan specialises in constitutional law, once served as US deputy assistant attorney general for voting rights, and lives with her partner, writer Viola Canales.ADVERTISING
At Wednesday’s (December 4) hearing, she was part of a panel of legal experts debating whether the president should be impeached, and in her opening statement referred to Trump putting pressure on Ukraine for political favours.
She told the House Judiciary Committee: “Based on the evidentiary record before you, what has happened in the case today is something that I do not think we have ever seen before: a president who has doubled down on violating his oath to ‘faithfully execute’ the laws and to ‘protect and defend the Constitution’.
“The evidence reveals a president who used the powers of his office to demand that a foreign government participate in undermining a competing candidate for the presidency.”
But when Doug Collins, a Republican on the Judiciary Committee, implied that Karlan was not qualified to comment at the president’s impeachment hearing, she clapped back: “Mr. Collins, I would like to say to you, sir, that I read transcripts of every one of the witnesses who appeared in the live hearing because I would not speak about these things without reviewing the facts, so I’m insulted by the suggestion that as a law professor I don’t care about those facts.”
Vanity Fair described her response as a “verbal bitch-slap”. She added that she had spent so much time over Thanksgiving reading the transcripts that she had to eat “a turkey that came to us in the mail that was already cooked”.
Later, she was questioned by representative Matt Gaetz over her political contributions. He listed that she had given $1,000 to Elizabeth Warren, $1,200 to Barack Obama and $2,000 to Hillary Clinton.
By the time Gaetz asked her why she had given more to Clinton than the other two, Karlan had had enough.
She said: “I’ve been giving a lot of money to charity because of all the poor people in the United States.”
Her snappy comebacks have even alerted Melania Trump. When making a point about the differences between a president and a king, she said: “So while the president can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron.”
This prompted an irritated response from the first lady on Twitter, which read: “A minor child deserves privacy and should be kept out of politics. Pamela Karlan, you should be ashamed of your very angry and obviously biased public pandering, and using a child to do it.”
While Karlan did apologise for mentioning the 13-year-old Barron during the impeachment hearing, she still managed to slide in a dig at Trump.
She said: “If I can just say one thing. I want to apologise for what I said earlier about the president’s son, it was wrong of me to do that.
“I wish the president would apologise obviously for the things that he’s done that’s wrong, but I do regret having said that.”