Maryland Transgender Anti-Discrimination Law Stands

*MARYLAND HIGH COURT THROWS OUT REFERENDUM PETITION THAT ATTEMPTED
TO OVERTURN A TRANSGENDER ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW
*
(Annapolis, September 9, 2008) - Today, the Maryland Court of
Appeals ruled that an inadequate referendum petition to block a
unanimously enacted transgender protection law may not go on the
ballot for the November general election, and the law must be
allowed to go into effect. The high court reversed the decision of a
Montgomery County Circuit Court judge, who had previously ruled that
the referendum effort to overturn the law should be allowed on the
November ballot, despite the acknowledgement that the petition did
not carry the legally required number of signatures. Today's ruling
by the high court is the final word on the fate of the referendum.
"The bottom line is that the court said a petition sponsor shouldn't
be allowed to cut corners and circumvent legal requirements to get a
referendum attacking minority protections on the ballot," said
Natalie Chin, Staff Attorney at Lambda Legal. "We are very happy
that this duly enacted law can take effect and protect a vulnerable
group of Montgomery County residents."

On November 13, 2007, the Montgomery County Council unanimously
passed an act adding gender identity to the county's civil rights
law in order to address discrimination against transgender
individuals. A group calling itself Citizens for Responsible
Government (CRG) sought to collect enough signatures on a referendum
petition to block the law from going into effect. Lambda Legal,
together with counsel retained by Equality Maryland, represented
concerned Montgomery County registered voters who opposed CRG's
flawed referendum effort to set back the clock on civil rights in
Montgomery County. Lambda Legal and Equality Maryland argued that
the number of signatures needed to put the referendum petition on
the November general election ballot was insufficient and that the
Montgomery County Board of Elections over-counted purported
signature entries in violation of detailed statutes that safeguard
the referendum process.
"This long overdue, crucial law is all about assuring that unchecked
bias is not allowed to inhibit our neighbors' abilities to make a
living or rent a home, and as a Montgomery County resident, I
breathe a sigh of relief that this campaign to roll back
anti-discrimination protections is now over," said Dan Furmansky,
Executive Director of Equality Maryland. "While we were ready to
make our case to the voters of Montgomery County, it is far better
that our transgender brothers and sisters be spared the rhetoric
that the referendum proponents have subjected them to over the past
year. Equality Maryland thanks Lambda Legal, the National Gay and
Lesbian Task Force, the law firm of Arnold and Porter, and the many
volunteers who came together to assure that our laws in Montgomery
County are on par with the 100 other jurisdictions nationally that
protect residents from discrimination on the basis of gender identity."
Susan Sommer, Senior Counsel, and Natalie Chin, Staff Attorney, are
on the case for Lambda Legal. Jonathan Shurberg, lead attorney for
Equality Maryland, argued the case. The case is Doe et al. v.
Montgomery County Board of Elections.

###

Equality Maryland: Dan Furmansky 301-461-4900 cell;
dan@equalitymaryland.org <mailto:dan@equalitymaryland.org>
Lambda Legal: Tika Milan 212-809-8585 ext. 223;
tmilan@lambdalegal.org <mailto:tmilan@lambdalegal.org>