Then one morning, Cunningham picked up a local newspaper with a front-page story under the headline, “Homosexual Prostitutes Move into Residential Neighborhood.” His address was listed below.

For days afterward, Cunningham said an angry mob gathered on his lawn hurling rocks and bricks and calling them “batty boys” – a Jamaican slang term for gay. Eventually, the pair grabbed what they could and fled on foot. Cunningham said neither he nor his boyfriend were prostitutes – the slur was just another example of the abuse gay men faced in Jamaica.

The story was one of many that Cunningham, now 32 and living in Worcester, recently shared with a federal immigration judge in his successful bid to win asylum in the United States. And it’s similar to other stories cited by a small but growing number of other gay, lesbian and transgender asylum seekers who are using U.S. immigration courts to argue that their sexual orientation makes it too dangerous for them to return home.

“I had no choice,” said Andre Azevedo, 39, a transgender man from Brazil who recently won asylum and now lives in New York. “Where I’m from, heterosexual men practice hate crimes against us like a sport, and the police do nothing to stop it.”

Since 1994, sexual orientation has been grounds for asylum in the United States. That’s when former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno ruled in a case that persecution based on sexual orientation could be potential grounds for asylum.

Until recently, those grounds have been rarely used and such cases represent only a fraction of all asylum cases.

But now immigrant and gay activists say more asylum seekers from the Middle East, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean are citing sexual orientation as reasons for seeking asylum. Activists say the asylum seekers are escaping rape, persecution, violence, and threats of death from places where homosexuality is either outlawed or strongly, socially shunned.

Federal immigration law allows individuals asylum if they can prove a well-founded fear of persecution in their country of origin based upon race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. Those applying for asylum are already in the United States, legally or illegally.

No one knows for sure just how many have sought asylum on sexual orientation grounds. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services doesn’t keep data on asylum cases won on that basis.

Still, last year Immigration Equality, a New York-based nonprofit group that helps gay clients with immigration cases, successfully won 55 asylum cases using sexual orientation as grounds, a record for the organization, said the group’s legal director Victoria Neilson. That’s up from 30 wins in 2007 and 27 in 2006, Neilson said.

And a Worcester, Mass.-based nonprofit group, Lutheran Social Services, has recently won five cases and is looking to help others.

“I think more people are finding out that this is an option,” said Lisa Laurel Weinberg, an attorney with the group.

However, not all cases for asylum based on sexual orientation have been successful. For example, a gay Brazilian man who was married in Massachusetts and whose American husband remains in the state was recently denied asylum by the Obama administration on humanitarian grounds, despite pleas from Sen. John Kerry. Genesio “Junior” Januario Oliveira had originally requested asylum because he was raped as a teenager, but an immigration judge denied the application, saying Oliveira repeatedly said in the hearing that he “was never physically harmed” by anyone in Brazil.

He was forced to return to Brazil in 2007.

Cunningham said he decided to file for asylum after working for a few years in the United States on a work visa. He conducted research online but couldn’t find an immigration group to help him with the case. “One group said my case clashed with their Christian values,” Cunningham said.

Many gay rights groups, he said, also had limited services for immigrants.

It wasn’t until Cunningham connected with Jozefina Lantz, the director of immigrant services at Lutheran Social Services, that Cunningham gained support.

To win, however, Cunningham had to revisit painful moments of running from mobs in Jamaica. Even the police would point him out for persecution, he said. In successfully arguing Cunningham’s case for asylum, Weinberg also said Jamaica’s sodomy laws banning sex between men and “dancehall” music – whose lyrics often advocate violence against gays – made life for Cunningham unbearable.

Cunningham won asylum in January 2008.

During his asylum hearing, Azevedo had to recall violent episodes in Brazil when he and a group of transsexuals were attacked in bars. He recalled a transgender woman set on fire. Each time Azevedo said he went to police about an attack or a threat, the officers didn’t even bother to file a report.

“I had such a horrific experience,” said Azevedo, who was granted asylum in July. “I was always in fear of being raped, maybe even killed.”

After winning their cases, both Cunningham and Azevedo have become advocates for other asylum-seekers by giving them counseling and directing them toward legal help.

In Worcester, for example, Cunningham has helped a Lebanese and three others Jamaicans win asylum with the legal help provided by the Lutheran Social Services’ “LGBT Human Rights Protection Project.” Another case, involving an Ugandan woman, is pending in the courts.

But while those who have been granted asylum are eager to help, Azevedo said many still haven’t resolved the pain from the past and can’t go back home to visit family – those who haven’t disowned them.

Cunningham said he hasn’t gotten over the fear that, at any moment, he may be forced to flee.

“I’ve never really owned furniture,” Cunningham said. “You just never know.”

(Philadelphia)  Today Lambda Legal will file a complaint with the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations (PCHR) against the City of Philadelphia and the Youth Study Center (YSC) among others on behalf of a 17-year-old transgender girl who was physically attacked by other residents and verbally abused by staff every day for almost a year and a half.

“Youth Study Center violated Philadelphia’s Fair Practices Ordinance when their staff discriminated against our client for being transgender,” said Flor Bermudez, Youth in Out-of-Home Care attorney for Lambda Legal. “This city facility was supposed to protect her but instead Youth Study Center staff failed to respect her gender identity, verbally abused her, let residents physically attack her and forced her to live in fear.”

The girl, who has asked to be unnamed for safety reasons, has been in the foster care system since she was 11.

In February 2008, a Family Court Judge ordered Department of Human Services to provide her with all appropriate medical treatment for Gender Identity Disorder (GID), including hormone therapy and mandated that her female gender identity be respected.

However, YSC staff and administrators failed to treat her in accordance with her female gender identity. They refused to refer to her by her preferred female name and to use female pronouns.  YSC staff also refused her access to clothing and grooming options that matched her gender identity and reprimanded her for acting in a feminine manner.

When she asked to be referred to by her preferred female name, YSC staff told her: “You ain’t no fucking female, you are a dude. . .   Till you get your dick cut off, I’m not going to call you [by your preferred female name.]”

In addition, YSC staff subjected Lambda Legal’s client to ridicule and cruel and degrading treatment and allowed abuse by residents on a daily basis.  She endured verbal harassment, including slurs such as: “You’re a faggot,” “Wanna-be-girl,” “You are not a girl,” and “You will never be a girl.”  On several occasions, the verbal harassment escalated to physical attacks.

The complaint filed by Lambda Legal to the PCHR claims that the YSC, operated by DHS, violated the Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance because she was harassed and discriminated against on the basis of her actual and/or perceived gender identity, sexual orientation, sex, and disability.

“Even though I asked the administration and staff at the Youth Study Center on multiple occasions to stop the harassment, to call me by the right name, to let me wear clothes that match who I am, and to allow me to sleep in a unit where I would feel safe, I continued to be degraded by staff and residents,” said the 17-year-old girl.

“Nobody, including sexual minorities, should have to experience the physical and emotional abuse that I encountered there.”

Through its Administration on Aging, HHS will award a single resource grant in the amount of $250,000 annually, depending on the availability of funds.  According to HHS, the center will provide resources to LGBT organizations, as well assisting mainstream aging services providers in developing cultural competence in serving LGBT elders. 
 
“Despite the many advances our community has seen, LGBT elders face significant discrimination from senior care providers, including in places where we are most vulnerable, such as assisted living facilities and end-of-life care,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.  “As more and more openly LGBT people reach their later years, it is incredibly important to ensure that we are treated with dignity, respect and fairness.  We applaud HHS for taking this important step on behalf of older LGBT Americans.”
 
HRC and Services and Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE) host a collaborative forum on LGBT aging issues, available at www.hrc.org/issues/aging/.  As part of the New Beginning Initiative, coordinated by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, SAGE has advocated for policy changes that would benefit LGBT elders.  Earlier this month, the Administration on Aging issued the first-ever grant focused on LGBT aging to the Los Angeles LGBT Community Service Center.  

“SAGE, the entire LGBT aging field, and  all those who work with and care for LGBT older adults, are thrilled by this announcement,” Michael Adams, executive director of SAGE, said in a statement. “For too long, programs that serve LGBT older people have been ignored and shut out from most public funding, and there has been no federal funding to help mainstream aging services become educated about and sensitive to the unique needs of  LGBT older adults. This resource center is a truly historic recognition of the needs of LGBT older adults across the country  and will make a huge difference in the lives of so many seniors.”

(Washington) U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan today announced a series of proposals to ensure that HUD’s core housing programs are open to all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

“The evidence is clear that some are denied the opportunity to make housing choices in our nation based on who they are and that must end,” said Donovan. “President Obama and I are determined that a qualified individual and family will not be denied housing choice based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”

The initiatives announced today will be a proposed rule that will provide the opportunity for public comment. The proposed rule will:

• clarify that the term “family” as used to describe eligible beneficiaries of our public housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs include otherwise eligible lesbian, gay, bi-sexual or transgender (LGBT) individuals and couples. HUD’s public housing and voucher programs help more than three million families to rent an affordable home. The Department’s intent to propose new regulations will clarify family status to ensure its subsidized housing programs are available to all families, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

• require grantees and those who participate in the Department’s programs to comply with local and state non-discrimination laws that cover sexual orientation or gender identity; and
• specify that any FHA-insured mortgage loan must be based on the credit-worthiness of a borrower and not on unrelated factors or characteristics such as sexual orientation or gender identity.

In addition to issuance of proposed rule, HUD will commission the first-ever national study of discrimination against members of the LGBT community in the rental and sale of housing.

HUD expects to begin the regulatory process immediately. The LGBT discrimination study is similarly fast tracked. HUD undertook important research in 1977, 1989 and 2000 to study the impact of housing discrimination on the basis of race and color.

It is believed that LGBT individuals and families may remain silent because in many local jurisdictions, they may have little or no legal recourse. HUD’s study will examine housing discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

While there are no national assessments of LGBT housing discrimination, there are state and local studies that have shown this sort of bias. For example, Michigan’s Fair Housing Centers found that nearly 30 percent of same-sex couples were treated differently when attempting to buy or rent a home (http://www.fhcmichigan.org/images/Arcus_web1.pdf).

In response, HRC issued this statement:

“Today, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced an unprecedented set of initiatives that will protect LGBT people and our families in one of the most fundamental aspects of life – finding and keeping a home,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.  “The policies proposed today will help some of the most vulnerable people in our community and the nationwide survey will finally shed light on the discrimination LGBT people face every day in trying to make homes for themselves and their families.  We thank Secretary Donovan and President Obama for taking this historic step forward.”

As part of its Blueprint for Positive Change, HRC submitted more than 70 recommendations for executive action which would improve the lives of LGBT Americans to the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition Team.  Since the administration began, HRC staff have met and communicated with numerous federal agencies on how to implement these policies.  The three policy changes proposed by today were part of HRC’s recommendations for HUD.

Ohio attorney general Richard Cordray told justices during oral arguments that Frank Spisak had a fair trial and deserves death. Cordray urged the high court to reverse a federal appeals court ruling that found Spisak had an ineffective trial lawyer and found that his jury received faulty sentencing instructions.

Spisak, 58, was convicted of three murders at Cleveland State University over a seven-month period in 1982 – crimes he said were motivated by his hatred of gays, blacks and Jews. At the same time, Spisak claimed his crimes were sparked by mental illness related to confusion about his sexual and gender  identity. He wants to have surgery to become a woman.

The 1983 trial became a public spectacle as Spisak celebrated his killings in court and openly discussed his hateful views. He even grew a Hitler-style mustache, carried a copy of Hitler’s book, “Mein Kampf” during the proceedings and gave the Nazi salute to the jury.

The 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled that Spisak’s trial attorney essentially gave up on his client in closing arguments by conceding that Spisak was “demented” and “undeserving of sympathy.”

Cordray acknowledged the defense lawyer’s argument was far from perfect, but said the attorney – now deceased – did the best he could with an unsavory client. He said the defense lawyer instead appealed to the jury’s sense of humanity to spare from death a defendant who was obviously very troubled.

“I don’t see easily how he could have done better,” Cordray said.

Michael Benza, representing Spisak on appeal, said the former defense lawyer essentially abandoned his client.

“It is the role of a defense counsel to advocate,” Benza said.

But most of the justices were skeptical of Benza’s arguments.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg noted that the Supreme Court had never found a defense lawyer to be ineffective solely on the basis of a closing argument if his conduct during the rest of trial was acceptable.

“You’re asking us to take a new tack,” she told Benza.

Chief Justice John Roberts said Spisak’s lawyer seemed to be trying to make the best out of a difficult situation by admitting to the jury that his client’s behavior was awful.

“It seems to me this disagreement is over different styles of strategy,” Roberts said.

Benza also argued that the instructions to jurors were flawed because they were not told that one juror’s vote against the death penalty would prevent a death sentence. Ohio law now includes such an instruction, although none was required at the time of Spisak’s trial.

It’s the second time the case has come before the high court. The justices reinstated Spisak’s death sentence two years ago in a 6-3 decision that scolded federal appeals courts for second-guessing trial judges in murder cases.

However, the appeals court reached the same conclusion it did the first time and threw out Spisak’s death sentence.

The New York City Commission for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning Runaway and Homeless Youth will address the problems of LGBTQ teens before they resort to running away, according to a press release. The program will provide homeless youth with housing and emotional support, plus family reuniting services.

Currently, the Department of Youth and Community Development offers drop-in centers, transitional independent living programs and street outreach services for homeless youth, but a new committee of 25 civic leaders will re-evaluate youth services and ensure they are targeting LGBTs.

“New York City may be one of the most tolerant places on earth, but LGBTQ youth still face daily discrimination that forces many of them to leave home and sometimes make risky decisions,” said Bloomberg.

Earlier this week, City Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn announced a significant expansion to New York’s anti-bullying program “Respect for All.” The program, founded in 2007, was created to prevent bullying and to help students deal with harassment inside the New York Public School System.

The recently-expanded initiative will extend training programs to all elementary school teachers and counselors and will guide principals in creating anti-bullying plans and maintaining a safe and supportive learning environment.

“Eliminating bullying and harassment in our schools is critical to preventing hate among future generations,” Quinn said. “And now, by increasing training opportunities and accountability, we’ve created the most comprehensive anti-harassment initiative in the nation.”

Staff training and accountability is cruciala, Quinn said. “Respect for All” schools are required to develop annual plans to convey appropriate standards of behavior to students and staff, investigate complaints properly, and require all staff to attend two-day training sessions.

The testimony from Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., comes as supporters of the measure believe Congress is closer than ever to banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Frank told the House Education and Labor Committee that opponents of the bill often accuse the gay rights community of pushing a “radical agenda.”

“Trying to get a job or join the military has not been the hallmark of radicalism,” he said.

Baldwin, whose home state of Wisconsin was the first to pass a law protecting gay employees from bias in 1982, said it was time “to bring our laws in line with the reality of American life.”

The Employment Nondiscrimination Act would ban employers from making any decisions about hiring, firing, promotions or pay based on a worker’s sexual orientation or gender identity. It would exempt the military, religious groups and businesses with fewer than 15 employees.

Opponents complain some of the bill’s language is too murky. It offers protection based on “perceived” sexual orientation and for workers who have “undergone” or are “undergoing” gender transition without defining those terms.

“It does not take a legal scholar to recognize that such vaguely defined protections will lead to an explosion in litigation and inconsistent judicial decisions,” said Minnesota Rep. John Kline, the committee’s top Republican.

Craig Parshall, general counsel for the National Religious Broadcasters, warned lawmakers the bill would subject religious groups to “a crazy quilt” of inconsistent court decisions and send a “chilling pall” over their activities.

He also argued that for-profit faith-based groups, like Christian radio stations, would be denied any exemption at all from the measure.

The House passed a similar bill two years ago – without protections for transgender workers – but it stalled in the Senate and faced the possibility of a veto from President George W. Bush. This time, President Barack Obama supports the bill.

Stuart Ishimaru, acting chairman of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said the measure would not create the chaos and confusion predicted by opponents.

Frank says chances have improved for passage, given a stronger Democratic majority this year. A House vote is expected later this year, but the Senate is not expected to consider it until next year.

Twenty-one states already ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, and 12 states also prohibit discrimination based on gender identity.

Manager Peter Lansdorf says Hunters Nightclub reluctantly imposed its new ID requirement because cross-dressing prostitutes were advertising on Craigslist and mentioning his tavern as a place they hung out.

Lansdorf concedes that the new rule could cut into the club’s substantial transvestite clientele, but says prostitution of any form could cost him his liquor license.

Spokesman Ed Yohnka of the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois says the new ID requirement may possibly be a violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act.

Noluthando Mayende-Sibiya says the international athletics governing body failed to safeguard the confidentiality of the runner whose sex has been questioned. She says they showed “blatant disregard” for Semenya’s “human dignity.”

The complaint made Monday asks the UN Division for the Advancement of Women to investigate the matter.

The International Association of Athletics Federations has refused to confirm or deny Australian media reports saying sex tests show that the women’s 800-meter world champion has both male and female characteristics.

A new national survey conducted online in mid-August by Witeck-Combs Communications and Harris Interactive shows two–thirds (67%) of GLBT adults say that things in the country are going in the right direction, compared to 45 percent of heterosexual adults.

This is an increase from June 2009 when 56 percent of GLBT adults said that things were moving in the right direction.
 
When it comes to their outlook on the economy and their own personal financial situation, GLBT adults also appear somewhat more confident then their heterosexual counterparts. A majority (57%) of GLBT adults said they expect the economy to improve in the coming year, compared to 45 percent of heterosexual adults. In the next 6 months just looking at gay and lesbian adults, 31 percent expect their household’s financial condition to be better, compared with 24 percent of heterosexual adults. The survey also found that more than two-thirds (69%) of GLBT adults would rate the overall job President Barack Obama is doing in handling the economy as excellent or pretty good, while only 38 percent of heterosexual adults agree.
 
The new nationwide survey of 2,709 U.S. adults, (ages 18 and over), of whom 378 self identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (which includes an over-sample of lesbian and gay adults), was conducted online between August 10 and 18, 2009, by Harris Interactive, a global market research and consulting firm, in conjunction with Witeck-Combs Communications, Inc., a strategic public relations and marketing communications firm with special expertise in the GLBT market.
 
While Americans are closely monitoring all aspects of the economy, GLBT adults continue to express more confidence in what the future may hold. Four out of five (82%) GLBT adults said they trust in President Barack Obama to do what is right for the American economy, compared with 60% of heterosexual adults. Nearly seven out of ten (69%) GLBT adults said they are confident that the White House and the Administration will produce policies to help fix the economic crisis, while a slender majority (51%) of heterosexual adults agree. Also, a majority (64%) of GLBT adults said they think the stimulus plan passed earlier this year has been successful, compared with 39% heterosexual adults. More than half (53%) of GLBT adults, contrasted with 30% of heterosexuals adults, rate the overall job President Barack Obama is doing in handling employment/unemployment as excellent or pretty good.
 
In contrast – when critical of the President’s leadership, one-third (35%) of heterosexuals adults said they blame President Barack Obama for the country’s economic problems, yet only 13% of GLBT adults agree. Also, one-fourth (27%) of heterosexual adults said they have no trust at all in President Barack Obama to do what is right for the American economy; only 7% of GLBT adults agree.
 
“It’s not surprising to see the higher marks that GLBT citizens give to the President and his Administration; last year’s exit polls, for example, suggest that at least three out of four gay and lesbian votes were cast for President Obama,” said Wesley Combs, President of Witeck-Combs Communications. “Keep in mind, this survey also addressed overarching national issues, and not policy matters affecting GLBT voters specifically such as gays serving openly in the military, or employment nondiscrimination. As we see our way through this difficult economic climate, we know that GLBT households are feeling the same stress and sacrifices as other Americans. Nonetheless, the optimism and confidence shown by GLBT households is very telling, and policymakers and business leaders should take strong note.”