Is Pennsylvania Set to Prohibit the Use of the ‘LGBTQ+ Panic’ Defense?

Newly inaugurated President Donald Trump made a unilateral declaration on his first day in office, stating that “there will be an official policy in the United States government recognizing only two genders, male and female.” This declaration has raised concerns among several lawmakers in Pennsylvania.

State House Democratic Whip  Rep. Mike Schlossberg of Lehigh County expressed his belief that advancing equality and protections would be challenging in the current political climate. He specifically mentioned the Fairness Act, which aims to eliminate legal discrimination, and noted the difficulties the bill would face in gaining support and passing.

During the last biennium, Pennsylvania House Democrats faced challenges in their efforts to achieve equality, despite the absence of an openly anti-gay, anti-trans president in the White House.

The Fairness Act, HB 300, received the endorsement of all Bucks County Democrats but did not garner support from any Bucks County Republicans. Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, a Philadelphia County Democrat, introduced the bill. Although it successfully passed the lower chamber during the previous legislative session, it did not gain approval in the Senate.

Despite the disheartening fact that a majority of the Pennsylvania General Assembly opposes equal rights for LGBTQ+ individuals, Representative Schlossberg and co-sponsor Representative Benjamin Sanchez from Montgomery County remain undeterred in their efforts to safeguard individuals who are perceived to be gay or transgender from unprovoked acts of violence. They are taking action by introducing legislation that will ban the use of the LGBTQ+ panic defense in the state.

According to Representative Sanchez, his commitment to enhancing protections in Pennsylvania is clear. He believes that the LGBTQ+ community is currently facing greater risks following the President’s recent remarks and Executive Order on gender identity.

He expressed, “The LGBTQ+ community is facing a higher rate of attacks, and it is our responsibility as allies to support and stand by them, both now and in the future. This sudden surge of motivation is not required for me to continue advocating for what is just and fair for this community.”

Recent FBI numbers reveal a concerning truth: hate crimes based on gender identity are increasing, which is alarming considering the overall decrease in violent crime.

Sanchez also commented on the president’s speech, stating that it did catch his attention, despite the recent events giving him a sense of urgency.

Furthermore, Schlossberg and Sanchez are aware that not all of their Senate colleagues may be willing to vote in favor of equality at this moment. They acknowledge that although the Fairness Act introduced last term aimed to include sexual orientation, gender identity, and expression as protected categories in various areas such as employment, housing, public accommodation, education, and commercial property under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, the support for this amendment may be limited among their fellow senators.

They are hopeful that their bill, which aims to ban the use of the “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, will be better received by their fellow legislators from both parties.

INTERVIEW: Raising a Transgender Child in an Increasingly Transphobic Country, with Brett Freeman

In this exclusive interview, we had the opportunity to speak with Brett Freeman about the challenges and experiences of raising a transgender child in a country where transphobia is on the rise. Brett shares their personal journey, shedding light on the struggles faced by both their child and themselves as parents.

Brett emphasizes the importance of creating a safe and accepting environment for their child, where they can freely express their gender identity without fear of prejudice or discrimination. They discuss the significance of open communication and education within their family, as well as the vital role that support networks play in navigating the challenges of raising a transgender child.

When asked about the impact of an increasingly transphobic society, Brett candidly shares the difficulties they have encountered. They highlight the importance of advocacy and allyship in combating transphobia, emphasizing the need for society to recognize and respect the rights and identities of transgender individuals.

Throughout the interview, Brett’s love and dedication to their child shine through. They discuss the joy and pride they feel in witnessing their child’s self-discovery and growth, and the importance of celebrating their child’s authentic identity.

This interview is a powerful reminder of the challenges faced by transgender individuals and their families in a world that still has a long way to go in terms of acceptance and understanding. Brett’s story serves as both an inspiration and a call to action, reminding us of the importance of love, support, and empathy in creating a more inclusive society for all.

The LGBTQ+ Bar Association defines the “LGBTQ+ panic” defense (also known as “gay or trans panic”) as a legal tactic used by defendants facing violent crime charges. This defense involves using the victim’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity/expression to lessen or avoid criminal responsibility.

A person who commits a violent crime and openly acknowledges it can potentially seek legal absolution by claiming that they were provoked or incited to violence due to the sexual orientations or intentions emanating from their victim. Similar to other defenses based on diminished capacity, the “LGBTQ+ panic” plea argues that the perpetrator should not be held accountable for their actions.

Pennsylvania is one of the few mid-Atlantic states that still allows the use of discrimination as a defense. In contrast, almost every neighboring state has banned the “LGBTQ+ panic” defense. This legal excuse for committing violent crimes is prohibited in New Jersey, New York, Maryland, Virginia, and Delaware. However, Ohio and West Virginia, the states to the west, still permit individuals to claim that they injured or killed someone based on their assumption or knowledge of the victim’s LGBTQ+ identity, using it as an explanation for their violent actions.

In response to the Pennsylvania legislature’s reluctance to take action against individuals who commit unprovoked acts of violence, Representative Schlossberg expressed his disbelief, stating, “I can’t understand why there would be any delay in banning the panic defense. It really shouldn’t be a difficult decision to make.”

Rep. Sanchez expressed her disappointment at the current situation. She noted that although it has become somewhat easier to navigate legislation on human rights in the House, the Senate continues to resist advancing democratic bills to the Governor’s desk. Rep. Sanchez emphasized the urgent need for both branches of government to collaborate and push the commonwealth forward, as the current impasse is detrimental to progress.

Sanchez and Schlossberg are hopeful that they can garner support from a few Republicans, particularly in the Senate, in order to push the ban forward in both chambers. Sanchez is optimistic that they will be able to secure the necessary support.

In discussing the prospects of passing LGBTQ+ Rights legislation, the lawmaker expressed a sense of optimism tempered by the acknowledgment of potential challenges. He acknowledged that while the uphill battle may not be impossible, it still remains an arduous task. However, he highlighted that among all the LGBTQ+ Rights bills he introduces annually, this particular one has faced the least resistance from Republicans.

Despite the relative openness to the legislation, the lawmaker emphasized the importance of voting based on individual conscience rather than party affiliation. This call for bipartisan support reflects the belief that progress in this area requires a collective effort that transcends partisan divides. Ultimately, the lawmaker expressed hope that such a cooperative approach is attainable in order to advance LGBTQ+ rights.

Pennsylvania Takes Important Step to Protect LGBTQ Youth By Rejecting ‘Conversion Therapy’

Last term, it would have been a mistake to have any hope for a ban, as every Republican on the Judiciary Committee voted against it. Additionally, due to parliamentary procedures, the ban never reached a vote in the entire chamber and was essentially killed on the House floor.

According to Corrine Goodwin, Executive Director of the Eastern PA Trans Equity Project, the bill is unlikely to pass without the active support of individual Pennsylvanians. Goodwin emphasizes the importance of reaching out to legislators, specifically Pennsylvania house representatives and state senators, and urging them to sign on and support the legislation.

Goodwin argues that it is crucial for individuals who currently feel safe walking down the street to advocate for equal protection for all residents of Pennsylvania. She emphasizes that no one has the right to use self-defense as an excuse for assaulting someone based on their race or language. The goal is not to seek special treatment, but rather to ensure that LGBTQ individuals are afforded the same rights and protections as any other member of the community.

As the backlash against the LGBTQ community continues to increase, advocates are finding hope in taking action.

Schlossberg wholeheartedly concurs. He firmly believes that Pennsylvania has the ability to safeguard its residents to a certain extent, shielding them from the shifting perspectives in Washington. “Can we protect them from the worst of harms? Absolutely. I have faith in the individuals within this state who are genuinely committed to ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to live the life they desire.”

The lawmaker recognizes the importance of the LGBTQ+ Panic Defense Ban as a crucial step towards achieving equality and freedom for all individuals. They firmly believe that it is their duty as an elected official to ensure that everyone is granted the same opportunities and rights that they themselves enjoy.

Sanchez agrees wholeheartedly. “I have dear friends and family who are directly affected by this, and I won’t turn my back on them when they need me the most. Even if I didn’t have personal connections to the LGBTQ+ community, I would still stand firm on this matter. I am a committed defender of our Constitution, and our nation is meant to be a place of freedom.”

The representative emphasizes that allowing individuals to escape accountability for assault or murder based on “LGBTQ+ panic” is not an example of freedom.

Reference Article