A federal judge in San Francisco on Thursday refused to reinstate President Donald Trump’s executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities.
The U.S. Department of Justice had asked U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick to reverse his own injunction in April against Trump’s executive order. The injunction was issued in response to lawsuits by San Francisco and Santa Clara County.
Judge will reconsider ruling blocking sanctuary cities order
Attorney General Jeff Sessions wrote a memo in May saying the executive order should be applied narrowly to a small number of grants and to very specific violations of immigration law. The memo said cities that “willfully refuse to comply” with federal law could lose grants from the Justice and Homeland Security departments, but not other federal funding.
The Justice Department said the memo negated the need for Orrick’s injunction.
Orrick said he found this unconvincing because Sessions could reverse himself at any moment.
The judge’s injunction stops enforcement across the country of the executive order, and allows the lawsuits to go forward.
And Orrick’s refusal to reverse it strikes another blow at Trump’s attempt to punish cities that give safe haven to those in the country illegally.
A lawsuit has been filed against Rep. Susan Davis, (D-San Diego) and three of her colleagues for displaying rainbow flags outside of their offices.
The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., by Chris Sevier, who describes himself as a lobbyist and Iraq War veteran reports the CW San Diego.
The other defendants name are Alan Lowenthal, (D-Long Beach), Donald Beyer, (D-Virginia), and Earl Blumenauer, (D-Oregon). In his complaint, Sevier said he was offended by Davis and the other defendants displaying the banner, a symbol of gay and lesbian pride, outside their offices.
Commenting on the lawsuit Davis said, “As the proud representative of the heart of LGBTQ San Diego, the rainbow flag in front of my DC office is a source of pride for me and my constituents. It is a symbol of our commitment to full equality.
“It is especially offensive to see this type of hateful behavior right after our city celebrated Pride with a record high turnout. It’s disheartening that in this day and age this is still an issue. Be assured that hateful lawsuits are not going to stop me from celebrating our nation’s diversity. If anything, this lawsuit is a reminder of the need for us to work even harder for full equality for all Americans.”
The California Assembly and the California Senate both voted Monday to extend the state’s cap-and-trade program, which requires companies to pay for carbon pollution, through 2030.
The bill passed with supermajorities in both chambers with bipartisan support, particularly in the Assembly, where seven Republicans voted in favor of the extension.
“Californians understand that we can’t truly have a healthy economy that’s built to last without taking meaningful steps to protect public health and preserve a livable environment,” California Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de León (D) said in a statement following approval of the extension. “This deal strikes that balance and shows once again California is more than ready to step up and lead where Washington will not.”
California’s original cap-and-trade bill passed in 2006 with a simple majority but has seen challenges from businesses groups, including the Chamber of Commerce, which argued that carbon pricing constitutes an illegal tax (that particular claim was rejected by the California Supreme Court earlier this year). New taxes in California require approval from two-thirds of the California legislature. This time around, to guard against future legal challenges — and thereby improve certainty in the carbon market—Gov. Jerry Brown (D) pushed for a super majority vote for the program’s expansion.
Brown, who has stepped into the national and international spotlight in the wake of the Trump administration’s dramatic reversal on climate action, pushed hard for the bill, telling legislators Thursday it constituted “the most important vote of your life.”
“I know we’ve got politics that have everybody on different sides,” Brown said. “This is fundamental, and that’s why I stand here and say it is the most important vote.”
California is the world’s sixth largest economy and is home to a massive oil and gas industry — one that is larger than several state economies, according to analysis by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation. It’s also home to one of the nation’s most progressive environmental movements and has considered itself a leader on environmental issues for decades.
On the Senate floor Monday, de León repeatedly referred to the extension as a “legislative unicorn,” because it was able to win support from a broad coalition of stakeholders, including environmentalists, businesses, and agricultural groups. Still, the bill — which was drafted over the course of a week and replaced a different extension that sought stricter pollution limits for oil and gas companies — sparked intense debate within the environmental community. Environmental justice groups, including the Sierra Club of California, 350.org, Food and Water Watch, Friends of the Earth, and the Center for Biological Diversity, all opposed the bill, claiming that it gives too much to the fossil fuel industry in return for too little for vulnerable communities.
“California is a worldwide leader in climate action, but AB398 reneges on this leadership by forsaking frontline communities,” Marce Gutiérrez-Graudiņš, founder and director of Azul, an organization working with Latinos to help protect oceans and coasts, said in a statement. “Californians deserve climate action for all, environmental justice groups are ready to work on better and more inclusive solutions.”
Chief among opponents’ criticism of the cap-and-trade bill is that, in a compromise with industry, the bill prevents the California Air Resources Board, which monitors and regulates air quality throughout the state, from directly regulating emissions from local sources that are also subject to cap-and-trade regulations. Throughout California, major polluters —like oil refineries, landfills, and industrial warehouses — tend to be concentrated in low-income communities and communities of color. Preempting local authorities from controlling those sources, critics claim, favors polluters over communities that live in the shadow of that pollution.
“I think we can all agree that climate change is something that needs to be addressed immediately,” Kathryn Phillips, director of the California Sierra Club, said during a Senate hearing on Monday. “We believe that the preemption language is a problem. We believe it sets a precedent.”
Assemblymembers Cristina Garcia and Eduardo Garcia, both Democrats, authors of the cap-and-trade expansion bill, and champions of the environmental justice movement, also proposed companion legislation meant to address some of the concerns from environmental justice groups. The companion legislation — which passed easily alongside the extension — requires more stringent monitoring, equipment updates, and stricter penalties for noncompliance for polluters.
“I would not be moving forward if I didn’t think this was a balanced package,” Garcia said during a press call on Saturday. “While none of us got everything, all of us collectively are in a better place.”
Oil and gas companies have been supportive of the bill, largely because they see it as an improvement over the volatility of California’s current carbon market. From the industry perspective, oil and gas interests argue that cap-and-trade, rather than a patchwork of local regulations, gives businesses a better sense of how to plan for long-term reductions in their emissions, because they know exactly what the cap on their emissions will be. It’s similar to the kind of compromise that the Climate Leadership Council — founded by former Republican cabinet members, ambassadors, and economists — proposes in their carbon tax scenario: a market-based solution in exchange for a rollback of regulatory control.
Reporting by In These Times suggests that fossil fuel interests — chiefly the Western States Petroleum Association, which includes members like Shell, BP, and ExxonMobil — had an outsized impact in writing the current cap-and-trade bill. According to In These Times, the preemption compromise came directly from fossil fuel interests, but was included by Brown’s office almost verbatim in the final proposed bill.
Critics of the bill have called the compromise a handout to the oil and gas industry, and have accused Brown of climate hypocrisy — courting China and other states on climate action while making deep concessions to fossil fuel interests at home.
“The oil lobby has had way too much influence on this legislation,” Bill Magavern, policy director of the Coalition for Clean Air, told reporters last Monday.
Not all environmental groups opposed the bill, however. Some, like Natural Resources Defense Council, Audubon Society, the League of Conservation Voters, and the Environmental Defense Fund, supported the cap-and-trade expansion, arguing that a compromise bill was better for climate action than letting the bill fail.
“The legislation represents a big step forward to continue California’s global climate leadership,” Alex Jackson, legal director of NRDC’s California climate project, said in a press statement. “The concessions to industry are bitter pills, but on balance the package ensures our emissions limits are enforceable against polluters and secures critical gains to improve air quality for millions of Californians.”
It’s true that other states — and countries from Canada to China—have cited California’s market as inspiration for their own trading schemes. But California’s cap-and-trade market has been particularly volatile in recent years, with two-thirds of pollution credits going unsold at an auction last year. Proponents of the new bill argue that extending the cap-and-trade program through 2030 would give the program the kind of legal and market certainty needed to reduce volatility in the state’s carbon auctions.
“If cap-and-trade falls apart, that will send a strong market to the world,” California State Senator Scott Wiener (D), who supported the bill, said during a hearing on Monday.
But if California’s cap-and-trade debate sends signals to the rest of the world, it also sends signals to progressive states looking to move forward with climate action in the face of the Trump administration. The factions that emerged within California’s cap-and-trade debate — environmental and social justice groups pushing for greater protection for vulnerable communities on one side, moderate business interests pushing for market certainty on another — reflect a similar fight that broke out in Washington state over that state’s proposed carbon tax initiative in November 2016. In that case, the carbon tax initiative fell short on election day, after environmental groups criticized the bill for failing to even consider the perspective of vulnerable, low-income communities of color.
The California cap-and-trade bill’s authors, for their part, claim to have gone into the drafting process with deep concern for climate equity and environmental justice.
“This cap-and-trade, climate change conversation, for me and the chairman, this for me isn’t about the melting ice caps or polar bears disappearing,” Garcia said during a committee hearing on Monday. “This is about the public health and well-being of the people of California.”
But environmental justice groups fear that the cap-and-trade extension is merely window-dressing for a state unwilling to reckon with both its lofty climate goals and powerful fossil fuel industry.
“This plan has Big Oil’s fingerprints all over it and doesn’t do enough to protect vulnerable communities or to achieve California’s ambitious targets for reducing carbon pollution,” Masada Disenhouse, 350.org’s U.S. Organizing Coordinator and a co-founder of SanDiego350, said in a press statement. “We need to extend California’s climate law, but we also need to protect the ability of local air districts to regulate pollution in their backyards — not give refineries and other fossil fuel infrastructure a free pass to pollute.”
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) spokesperson Drew Godinich released the following statement: “The men and women who serve in the American military, who put their lives on the line every day to protect the freedoms that we hold dear, are heroes. It is our responsibility as Americans to support those who are willing to take that most sacred oath. The remarks earlier this week by congressional Republicans tarnish that responsibility. When it comes to serving your country, it should not matter whether you are gay or straight or trans – only that you believe in the values and ideals of this nation, and that you are willing to sacrifice everything to protect them. Duncan Hunter and his fellow Republicans should immediately apologize.”
Nine bills authored by Sen. Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) have moved forward in the state Assembly:
SB 179, the Gender Recognition Act, has cleared the Assembly Judiciary Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Transportation Committee. The bill creates a third gender marker on state-issued identification documents for people who identify as nonbinary – neither male nor female – and streamlines the process for transgender, intersex and nonbinary Californians to obtain identification documents that accurately reflect their gender.
SB 214 has cleared the Assembly National Resources and Appropriations committees. The bill strengthens the capacity of the San Diego River Conservancy to protect and enhance historic, cultural and natural resources within the watershed along the 52-mile San Diego River. It adds representation from the City of Santee and the Kumeyaay Diegueño Land Conservancy to the conservancy’s Board of Directors. It also provides the conservancy with greater ability to enter into joint-powers agreements.
SB 223 has cleared the Assembly Health Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The bill requires health plans in California to meet the higher nondiscrimination, consumer-protection and language-assistance standards that exist in the Affordable Care Act – no matter what happens to the ACA – ensuring equal access to affordable healthcare, regardless of race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, age, sex, sexual orientation or disability.
SB 285 has cleared the Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The bill makes it clear under the law that public employers are prohibited from deterring or discouraging public employees from becoming or remaining members of union.
SB 310, the Name and Gender Act, has cleared the Assembly Judiciary Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Public Safety Committee. It establishes the right of people in state prisons and county jails to access the courts to obtain a name or gender change. It also requires corrections officials to use the new name of a prisoner who has successfully obtained a name change.
SB 379 has cleared the Assembly Education Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Health Committee. The bill clarifies that schools that offer free oral-health assessments may facilitate dental screenings by requiring parents to opt-out if they do not want their children to receive an assessment, although any treatment would require active consent. It also requires schools to report to counties aggregate data on tooth decay and encourages schools to report oral-health data to the state.
SB 462 has cleared the Assembly Judiciary Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The bill clarifies that probation departments may access juvenile-justice data in order to fulfill reporting requirements or conduct research to improve their programs. It also permits courts to authorize probation departments to provide third-party researchers to with limited access to juvenile case files to conduct research on juvenile-justice populations and the programs that serve them. SB 462 ensures that no personally identifying information from a juvenile case file may be released, disseminated or published.
SB 548 has cleared the Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The bill ensures that public-employee grievances that involve claims of bad-faith bargaining are eligible to be expedited by the Public Employee Relations Board (PERB).
SB 667 has cleared the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee and has been sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The bill enables the Riverine Stewardship Assistance Program (RSAP), which was created in the 2016-17 fiscal year state budget. The RSAP provides technical and financial support for stream restoration, reduced flood risk and improved habitat corridors, empowering communities to reconnect with and take pride in their neighborhood waterways.
California’s state budget could take a $30 billion annual hit if health care legislation proposed by U.S. Senate Republicans is passed, state officials said Wednesday.
An analysis by the state Department of Health Care Services concludes the bill would have a $114.6 billion cumulative impact on California’s budget between 2020 and 2027. It would initially add $3 billion in costs in 2020 and increase to $30 billion by 2027.
The costs would come largely from reductions in federal Medicaid funding. One in three Californians are on Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program that provides health coverage to the poor. More than 3.8 million people gained coverage through an expansion of the program included in former President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.
The Senate GOP legislation “takes a sledgehammer” to improvements in California’s health care system, said Jennifer Kent, the department’s director. It changes the funding structure for all 13.5 million Californians on Medi-Cal, not just those who joined following the passage of Obama’s law.
“If the world ends up under this bill, we’d be faced with very difficult choices about how to operate the Medi-Cal program going forward,” said Mari Cantwell, the state Medicaid director.
The state would have to look at cutting people out of Medi-Cal, eliminating the covered services and reducing payments to doctors and hospitals.
Republican U.S. Senate leaders this week delayed a vote on the bill until after its July 4 break once it became clear it lacked support to pass this week.
State officials say the Senate bill would cut less funding in the short term than legislation approved earlier this year by the U.S. House, but more in the long-term.
Covered California, the state’s insurance exchange, on Wednesday released an analysis of how the Senate bill would affect the middle-income consumers who receive subsidized private coverage under Obama’s law. Out-of-pocket costs would drop slightly for some people — particularly younger people. Annual premiums for a 27-year-old making $50,000 a year in Los Angeles County would drop from $3,000 to $2,760.
But costs would rise significantly for older consumers, according to the analysis by Covered California and the National Academy for State Health Policy. For a 60-year-old making $50,000 in Los Angeles, the annual cost would rise from $5,100 to $10,420.
Meanwhile, in an indication of the liberal anger over the future of health care policy, demonstrators crowded into the California Capitol Wednesday to protest the death of a bill that would have provided government-funded health care to everyone in the state.
Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Paramount, announced on Friday that he doesn’t plan to take up the bill making California the state’s only health care funder. The California Nurses Association, which wrote and advocated the bill, led chants in in the Capitol rotunda that echoed throughout the building as demonstrators ignored pleas from a California Highway Patrol officer to avoid disrupting people trying to work.
Some demonstrators held signs showing the bear from California’s flag with a knife in its back, the knife labeled “Rendon.” They said Rendon was bowing to pressure from business interests.
“It was a copout. It was pathetic,” said Toni Hill, a 39-year-old registered nurse from Grass Valley northeast of Sacramento. “He needs to remember that he’s supposed to be a man of the people.”
In announcing his decision, Rendon said he’s long been a supporter of single-payer health care, but called the bill, SB562, “woefully incomplete.” It lacks key details about financing, delivery of care and cost controls, he said.
The California Legislative LGBT Caucus will celebrate June 2017 as Pride Month with the adoption of House Resolution 41 during Assembly Floor Session and Senate Resolution 46 during Senate Floor Session Monday, June 19. As part of the ceremony, the Caucus will honor 10 LGBT individuals and the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus in appreciation of their outstanding accomplishments, leadership and activism to help advance equality for the LGBT community. This summer is the 15 year anniversary of the Caucus’s formation.
HONOREES:
Mikayla Connell, Police Officer at the San Francisco Police Department
Robert Gleason, President and Chief Executive Officer of Evans Hotels
Roma Pauline Guy, Activist and Founder of San Francisco Women’s Building
Joel Flatow, Chief of West Coast Operations and Artist & Industry Relations for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)
Daniel Jimenez, Activist and Volunteer at the San Joaquin Pride Center
Ken Jones, Activist and Member of the BART Police Department Citizen Review Board
Michaela Mendelsohn, Pollo West Corp & Mi Pollo, Inc.
Russell Roybal, Deputy Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
Brian Reagan, Manager of Pulse Night Club and survivor of Orlando, FL shooting
Rick Zbur, Executive Director of Equality California
Chris Verdugo and Dr. Tim Seelig on behalf of the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus
Originally formed in 2002, the Caucus serves as a forum for the California Legislature to discuss issues that affect LGBT Californians and to further the goal of equality and justice for all residents in the State. Comprising both Senators and Assemblymembers, current Caucus members include: Chair Evan Low, Vice Chair Ricardo Lara, Senators Toni G. Atkins, Cathleen Galgiani, and Scott Wiener, and Assemblymembers Susan Talamantes Eggman, Sabrina Cervantes, and Todd Gloria. The Caucus’s formation made California the first state in the country to recognize an official caucus of openly-LGBT state legislators.
San Francisco’s Congresswoman, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, joined hundreds of volunteers at the National AIDS Memorial for a community volunteer workday to commemorate her 30 years in Congress. Since her first days in Washington D.C., she has been a leader, champion and hero on the issue of HIV/AIDS and her avid support of the LGBT community.
During the morning activities, Congresswoman Pelosi joined volunteers as they planted flowers, new shrubs and a tree, in addition to helping maintain the grounds of the Nation’s AIDS Memorial. The event also marked a significant milestone for the National AIDS Memorial as it has surpassed 200,000 hours given by community volunteers to create and maintain the 10-acre living memorial.
For the past thirty years, Congresswoman Pelosi has worked courageously to advance the issue of HIV/AIDS, supporting major funding, research and programs that have been critically important to the advancements and improvement of the quality of life for those living with the disease. In 1996 she successfully spearheaded the passage of legislation that was signed by President Bill Clinton designating San Francisco’s AIDS Memorial Grove, as a National Memorial.
“Thirty years ago our community was ravaged by AIDS and with the leadership of Congresswoman Pelosi we came together here in this grove to heal and remember our lost friends and loved ones,” said John Cunningham, Executive Director, National AIDS Memorial. “Her courage to stand-up and fight for our community paved the way for this memorial. Without her leadership this memorial would not be possible. We are forever grateful for her tireless spirit, love and willingness to fight for our cause.”
Congresswoman Pelosi has faithfully commemorated her milestone years in Congress by volunteering at the Grove. She has volunteered on many other occasions over the years, often bringing her family and grandchildren to be a regular part of the Grove’s Community Volunteer Workdays.
“The National AIDS Memorial is not just a place for where we come and remember those we’ve lost, it is a place where people from around the country, around the world, can come together to remember their lives, to hope and continue working tirelessly until we find a cure,” said Congresswoman Pelosi. “This sacred ground honors all who have been touched by HIV/AIDS but more importantly, it forever keeps their spirit, their love and their stories with us and so future generations never forget. This grove inspires us to keep fighting in their memory and for what’s right.”
Since the first Workday in 1991, nearly 40,000 volunteers have participated in more than 300 Community Volunteer Workdays, donating more than 200,000 volunteer hours and planting more than 10,000 trees, plants and shrubs. For more information visit www.aidsmemorial.org
The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (“Lawyers’ Committee”), represented by Jones Day, recently requested permission from the court to file an amicus curiae, “friend of the court,” brief in the Northern District of California in the case of Shen et al. v. Albany Unified School District et al. The National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) also signed on in support of the brief, which was filed on Friday. The amicus brief addresses the pernicious impact of hate speech targeting people on the basis of race and gender on individuals and communities, particularly in the school setting.
The case involves an Instagram account created earlier this year by a handful of high school students in Albany, California. Postings to the account targeted students of color, most of whom were girls, and an African American staff member. The postings included pictures of nooses around the necks of one African American student and her African American basketball coach; images comparing African-American students to a gorilla; a black doll alongside images of a Ku Klux Klan member, a torch and a noose; and pictures showing the result of African American men being lynched and burned. A number of students that were following the Instagram page commented on and/or “liked” the images.
As the brief details, hate speech and cyber-hate can have a devastating effect on its targets, who may suffer physically and emotionally. In these instances, schools are not only able to step in and take action, but may have a duty to do so under federal civil rights laws.
“Racist and sexist images targeting students can have a real and devastating impact on the physical and mental health of students at a time when they should be focusing on their education,” said Kristen Clarke, President and Executive Director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “As we see an increase in hate spread through online platforms, schools must recognize the harm that cyber-hate can have on their students and school communities and take action to ensure that all students can learn in a safe environment free from discrimination. These issues are especially important for African American and other minority students who are far too often the targets of harassment and bullying.”
Targets of cyber-hate, like the students in California, are more likely to report depression and are at risk of feeling isolated and withdrawn in school, therefore threatening their ability to learn and thrive. They may also experience migraines and nightmares, and lose motivation.
After learning of the Instagram account, Albany High School officials took disciplinary action against the students involved in creating the account and the students who endorsed its images. Some of the students involved with the account then sued the school claiming, among other things, that the school’s actions violated their First Amendment rights. The brief filed by the Lawyers’ Committee does not support either party in the case, but rather focuses on the harm caused by the circulation of racist and sexist images.
In partnership with the Communities Against Hate coalition, communitiesagainsthate.org, the Lawyers’ Committee’s Stop Hate Project seeks to strengthen the capacity of community leaders, law enforcement, and organizations around the country to combat hate by connecting these groups with established legal and social services resources.
Sunday, June 11, the Los Angeles #ResistMarch will bring together people from all walks of life for a peaceful protest march that will begin at the intersection of Hollywood Blvd. and Highland Ave. in Los Angeles and conclude at the intersection of Santa Monica Blvd. and La Peer Dr. in West Hollywood. Instead of a Pride Parade celebrating the past progress of the LGBTQ+ community, the #ResistMarch will be a gathering to ensure the community’s future.
“This year the LGBTQ+ community is lending its iconic rainbow flag to anyone who feels their rights are at risk and to everyone who believes that America’s strength is its diversity.” said Brian Pendleton, Founder of #ResistMarch. “When they come for one of us, they come for all of us. Which is why we our diverse intersectional community must unite as one.”
This intersectional diversity is reflected in the wide array of over 100 partner organizations that have committed their support to the #ResistMarch, including GLAAD, Planned Parenthood, Black Lives Matters, ACLU, Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, the Human Rights Campaign, APLA, Bienestar, the City of West Hollywood, among others.
“GLAAD is proud to support the #ResistMarch on June 11th. In a time when LGBTQ people are being erased, it is now more important than ever that we stand in solidarity,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, President & CEO of GLAAD.
Sue Dunlop, President & CEO of Planned Parenthood Los Angeles, noted, “On June 11th, we will join the #ResistMarch in support of fundamental civil and human rights for all people, everywhere.”
John D’Amico, Councilmember proclaimed “The shoulders we stand on are broad and strong. And have carried us here. The #ResistMarch is showing up for yourself and your rights. The #ResistMarch is peace and protest and pleasure and passion and people. The #ResistMarch is authentic. The #ResistMarch is who we are.”
#ResistMarch organizers have prepared a brief opening ceremony with speakers in Hollywood and at the end of the march route, marchers will rally with speaker program and entertainment. Speakers include: U.S. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Congressman Adam Schiff, U.S. Congresswoman Maxine Waters, U.S. Congressman Ted Lieu, California, Los Angeles Councilman Mitch O’Farrell, Los Angeles Councilman David Ryu, West Hollywood Mayor John Heilman, Trans Activist Bamby Salcedo, AIDS Activist Phil Wilson, #ResistMarch Founder Brian Pendleton, HRC President Chad Griffin, Haim, Margaret Cho, RuPaul, Adam Lambert, Jussie Smollett, Cheyenne Jackson, The Gay Men’s Chorus Of Los Angeles, The Trans Chorus of Los Angeles, America Ferrera, Black Lives Matter’s Dr. Melina Abdullah, NALEO National Chairman John Duran, Planned Parenthood’s Sue Dunlap, Los Angeles LGBT Center’s Lorri Jean, Women’s March L.A. Founder Emi Guereca and more.