BISMARCK, – Pride Month is coming to North Dakota's capital city next weekend.

The state's LGBTQ community has events planned June 14 through 16 in Bismarck, including a riverboat cruise, drag show and multi-faith service and potluck. The community also is taking the celebration to the State Capitol lawn for the first time.

Matt Liedholm is treasurer with the group Dakota OutRight, which hosts Capital Pride. He says Pride used to take place outside of town, and having it in front of the Capitol is important because it shows the community feels comfortable there.

"Let's go to the most visible symbol of our community and have it there,” says Liedholm. “So that went into our thinking. So much of our fight is in that state Capitol here in North Dakota and so, let's bring our celebration there as well."

Pride on the Capitol lawn is June 15 at 11 a.m.. This year also marks the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Riot in New York City – often recognized as the beginning of the modern-day LGBTQ movement.

New York's police commissioner recently apologized for the department's treatment of gay, lesbian and transgender patrons of the Stonewall Inn, who became fed up with harassment and pushed back against police in June 1969. Liedholm says the community in North Dakota no longer deals with harassment like that, but often faces other indignities.

"Incorrect marriage certificates, struggles with adoption, struggles with employers and landlords, things like that,” says Liedholm. “We see this as a continuation of that struggle, which was formally started 50 years ago and absolutely continues today."

Liedholm also believes state legislators have ramped up anti-LGBTQ rhetoric in recent years, which he doesn't think matches North Dakotans' welcoming spirit. For the fifth session in a row, lawmakers voted down a measure that would have banned discrimination based on sexual orientation in areas like employment and housing.


get more stories like this via email

Inauguration Day is still five weeks away and gay married couples are already watching for signs conservative lawmakers and the courts may attempt to turn back the clock.

In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court ruled in 2015 it was unconstitutional to prohibit same-sex marriage.

Marshall Martinez, executive director of the advocacy group Equality New Mexico, said it is concerning two justices have publicly suggested the 2015 court decision should be re-litigated but encouraging Congress passed the "Respect for Marriage Act" in 2022.

"What we know right now, even if Obergefell is overturned, as long as New Mexico maintains the legalization of same-sex marriages, the federal government will still recognize those New Mexicans' marriages," Martinez outlined.

In supporting the high court's decision to overturn abortion rights in 2022, Justice Clarence Thomas said the court also should revisit the same-sex marriage decision. Justice Samuel Alito has also criticized the landmark ruling. President-elect Donald Trump did not make marriage equality a campaign issue but has surrounded himself with anti-LGBTQ+ staff and appointees.

Martinez reported within the first two days after the Nov. 5 election, LGBTQ+ crisis lines in the U.S. experienced a 700% increase in calls from people concerned about what the outcome might mean for those who identify as gay. He stressed fear and anxiety are premature.

"We're not going to sugarcoat it forever but we have been saying, 'It's not time to panic,'" Martinez explained. "And what we mean by that is we don't know what's going to happen yet. We have some ideas of what they might want to do but we don't know and there's nothing helpful about sort of sitting around in despair and panic, trying to anticipate the worst-case scenario."

Martinez believes some conservative states will continue to criminalize the LGBTQ+ community through bans on gender-affirming care, while others worry newly appointed Trump officials will attempt to slash federal funding for HIV prevention and treatment.

By Andrew Tobias for Signal Cleveland.
Broadcast version by Shanteya Hudson for Ohio News Connection reporting for the Signal Ohio-Public News Service Collaboration

State Sen. Nickie Antonio of Lakewood and other Democrats in the Ohio Senate gave a forceful defense of their party’s stance on transgender rights this week after majority Republicans approved a bathroom bill for state schools and universities.

The bill would require K-12 schools and colleges to designate bathrooms and locker rooms for single-sex use based on students’ sex assigned at birth. The bill passed 23-7, with all Republicans voting “yes” and Democrats voting “no.” It now heads to Gov. Mike DeWine, who soon will decide whether or not to sign it into law.

The vote offered an early example in Ohio of how Democrats may approach LGBTQ issues following the Nov. 5 election. Before the election, Republicans hammered Sen. Sherrod Brown and other vulnerable Democrats on transgender issues.

Since then, some Democrats have suggested backing off of defending transgender rights to try to broaden the party’s appeal, particularly among minority and working-class voters who tend to be more socially conservative. Polling commissioned by Ideastream Public Media, WKYC and Signal Ohio found a majority of Northeast Ohio voters surveyed, including a significant number of Democrats, support the Republican position. LGBTQ advocates have said transgender-related issues are misunderstood by the public unless they have a personal connection. 

But Antonio, who in 2010 became the first openly gay person elected to the state legislature, said Senate Democrats didn’t privately debate the bill’s political merits ahead of the vote. Rather, their discussion focused on how they viewed it as morally wrong.

“We are not going to kick transgender people to the curb and say, well, you’re just dragging us down,” Antonio told Signal Statewide.

During the debate on the floor of the Ohio Senate on Thursday before the vote on the transgender bathroom bill, Republican senators said the election results reinforce that public opinion is on their side.

“Ohioans and Americans … don’t want boys in girls’ sports, they don’t want boys in girls’ locker rooms. They don’t want girls in boys’ bathrooms. It’s for the safety of the kids. And this message was sent loud and clear last week during the national election,” said state Sen. Kristina Roegner, a Hudson Republican.

But Democrats said they view the matter as a civil rights issue.

Antonio said she’s previously resisted private calls to remove the “T” from an LGBTQ nondiscrimination bill that a coalition of gay-rights groups and businesses have tried to pass unsuccessfully for years.

“There has been an effort to segment them off because they are the most marginalized, the most vulnerable, the most misunderstood,” Antonio said of transgender people. “That doesn’t mean we should do it. That means a lot more work has to happen for people to understand rather than malign them.”


Andrew Tobias wrote this article for Signal Cleveland. This story was produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding whether to review a Wisconsin case over the issue of gender identity at school.

The case Parents Protecting Our Children v. Eau Claire Area School District asks to strike down a school policy some parents believe infringes upon their right to make major health-related decisions with their children.

The district said its policy was created to provide direction and resources for transgender students and those with questions about their gender identity, including when they do not feel safe or accepted at home.

Hayley Archer, staff attorney at the ACLU of Wisconsin, said the focus should remain on the children.

"I believe one of the reasons that this question is debated is because it is complex," Archer observed. "We're balancing the rights of parents, we're balancing the rights of schools, we're balancing the rights of students. And ultimately, the safety of the student, in my opinion, the most important of these rights."

The parent group argued the school policy encourages kids to hide important aspects of their health, like changing pronouns at school. Lower courts have dismissed the case because none of the group's children are involved. So, it is now asking the U.S. Supreme Court, which hears about 1% of requested cases, to review it.

Luke Berg, deputy counsel at the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, who represents Parents Protecting Our Children, said usurping parental rights can be harmful to kids with questions about their gender identity.

"Children who have struggled with this and later come out of it have said, 'It was not actually helpful for me to have adults around me affirming that I was really the opposite sex; it actually confused me further.'" Berg asserted. "This can do harm to children and in our view, that's why parents need to be involved."

The Wisconsin Office of Children's Mental Health reports nearly half of LGBTQ+ youth in the state seriously consider suicide. Nationwide, the rates drop significantly for transgender and nonbinary youth who feel accepted at home, according to the Trevor Project. It noted, however, fewer than 40% of LGBTQ+ youth feel accepted at home.


get more stories like this via email