[Update]US: Missouri Governor signs bill that modernises HIV criminalisation laws

Missouri Updates HIV Laws Criminalizing Transmission For The First Time In Over 30 Years

For the first time since enacting HIV laws in the 1980s, Missouri will update its laws that make it a crime to expose a person to the virus. Gov. Mike Parson on Wednesday signed a bill that reduces the charges a person faces for transmitting the virus.

Missouri joins a number of states that have passed such legislation this year. Legislatures around the country are moving to correct HIV laws that were based on false assumptions about how the virus is transmitted.

Advocacy groups and politicians in Missouri successfully lobbied for SB 53, a sweeping measure affecting police and prosecutors, to include changes to the state’s HIV laws after years of attempts to pass similar legislation. Public health professionals say laws criminalizing HIV have not reduced transmission of the virus.

Under the new law, prosecutors must prove someone “knowingly” exposed a person to the virus to obtain a felony conviction. The measure also reduces the minimum sentence from 10 years to 3 years, if the person contracts HIV. A previous law made it a felony crime in Missouri to “recklessly” expose another person to HIV, which is harder to defend in court.

Missouri’s updated law goes into effect on Aug. 28.

While the Missouri HIV Justice Coalition wants state lawmakers to eliminate laws against transmitting the virus, some advocates say the law lessening penalties is still a victory for the more than 13,000 people in Missouri who live with HIV.

“We still feel like it’s a really strong step in the right direction, to make sure that the laws are medically accurate and are charging people at an appropriate level,” said Mallory Rusch, executive director for Empower Missouri, an advocacy group within the HIV Justice Coalition that lobbied for the bill’s passage.

Advocates argued the old law was outdated, since modern medication can reduce people’s viral load to undetectable levels. People who are consistently on HIV treatment for at least six months cannot transmit HIV to others.

The former law treated all HIV-positive people as if they were a public health risk, Rusch said. The new law updates language to correct misconceptions about how HIV is transmitted. HIV transmission doesn’t occur through saliva or touching. It’s very rarely transmitted through biting or oral sex.

“[The old laws] were based on faulty assumptions about science, and it’s no fault of the legislature at the time, it’s just all they knew,” said Rep. Phil Christofanelli, R-St. Peters, who filed the bill in the House. “Back in the ‘70s and ‘80s, when HIV entered the public consciousness, the legislators at the time first thought it was a death sentence.”

Public health professionals say they still feel the consequences of faulty science and outdated laws.

“It put people living with HIV in a position to where, number one, they’re criminalized unfairly, but two propagated the stigma and the shame that still persists around people living with HIV,” said Dr. Matifadza Hlatshwayo Davis, an infectious disease specialist at Washington University School of Medicine.

Davis, who has treated people with HIV for more than a decade, said laws that penalized HIV transmission discouraged people from getting tested because if people didn’t know their HIV status, they couldn’t be charged.

But that also led to people forgoing necessary treatment.

“If people don’t see this big fear about being criminalized, they may be more willing to take a test to find out what their status is,” said Erise Williams Jr., CEO of Williams and Associates, a public health agency in St. Louis that has a robust HIV program.

Since 1990, more than 100 people in Missouri have been convicted of an HIV crime, according to the Williams Institute, a think tank at UCLA Law.

The institute found Black men account for half of HIV crime arrests and convictions in the state, despite being only 5.5% of the state’s population.

In St. Charles County, a Black student at Lindenwood University made national headlines in 2015 when a judge sentenced him to 30 years in prison after a jury found him guilty of infecting one partner with HIV and endangering four others. An appeals court later ruled that Michael L. Johnson’s trial was “fundamentally unfair” and granted him parole after he had served five years.

Public health professionals say Johnson’s and other high-profile cases of alleged intentional HIV transmission have distorted the public’s view that this is a common occurrence and have instead undermined efforts to prevent infections.

That’s led lawmakers in Nevada, Illinois and Oregon to change their HIV laws this year, either adjusting punishments for transmission or expanding access to HIV medication.

Illinois’ legislature recently passed a bill to completely decriminalize HIV, which would make it only the second state to do so, after Texas. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has yet to sign the bill into law.

Missouri expands access to HIV preventive medication

Missouri’s Republican-controlled legislature also passed a bill during the 2021 session to allow pharmacists to dispense HIV medication. Parson signed the bill into law last month, making Missouri the fourth state to do so.

Pharmacists must be trained by a doctor before they can give someone post-exposure prophylaxis.

If the medication is started within 72 hours of an HIV exposure, it can greatly decrease chances of contracting the virus. But getting the pill during that crucial window can be difficult in rural areas with few health care providers.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 13 mostly rural counties in Missouri are at risk for an HIV outbreak.

Rep. Christofanelli co-sponsored the bill to make the drug more accessible. Medicaid and Medicare both cover PEP.

“I think public health issues cross party boundaries,” he said. “HIV is something that’s affecting this entire state whether you live in a rural area community or an urban or suburban community, like mine. And Missouri has continued to come up on national news stories for the prevalence of spread of HIV across our state.”

Published in December in Empower Missouri

Lawmakers Pass Legislation To Update Missouri’s Outdated HIV Criminalization Laws

After decades on the books, Missouri lawmakers have finally passed legislation to update the criminal codes dealing with the prosecution of people living with HIV.

The legislation, introduced by Senator Holly Rehder (R-27) and Representative Phil Christofanelli (R-105), rewrites Missouri’s HIV-specific criminal laws. The bill would lower the penalties under the HIV exposure statute and raise the level of intent a prosecutor would need to prove in order to convict someone of a felony. The legislation also updates the law to be consistent with medical science by limiting the law to only cover activities that have been scientifically shown to create a substantial risk of transmission. Further, the measure would combat the stigma associated with HIV by ending the singling out of HIV and instead making the law apply to all “serious non-airborne infectious or communicable diseases.”

Missouri’s current law allows prosecutors to charge an HIV-positive person with a felony based on whether she or he can prove they disclosed their HIV status to their sexual partner. If someone knows they are living with HIV but does not disclose their status before engaging in certain activities considered to be “exposure”— some of which don’t carry any risk of transmission — they can be charged with a class A felony (punishable by 15-30 years in prison) if transmission occurs and with a class B felony (punishable by five to fifteen years in prison), even if no HIV transmission actually occurs. And several Missouri laws punish people living with HIV at a higher level simply because of their HIV status.

Between 1990 and 2019, at least 593 people have been arrested in Missouri for an HIV/hepatitis crime, including 318 who were convicted for those crimes. Missouri has had one arrest for an HIV crime for every 60 people living with HIV in Missouri.

The Missouri HIV Justice Coalition, Empower Missouri, not-for-profits focusing on health care and better public policy, and long-term HIV survivors have supported rewriting the HIV criminalization laws for the last five years.

Empower Missouri’s Executive Director Mallory Rusch said, “We are thankful that Missouri lawmakers have finally taken a step in the right direction and have updated the state’s outdated and medically inaccurate HIV criminalization laws. Empower Missouri believes the updated law will reduce stigma associated with HIV and, in turn, encourage more people to get proper testing and treatment..”

Empower Missouri is pleased with the passage of the legislation, but will also continue to advocate for additional changes to the criminal code in future sessions, including removing the sentencing enhancement for people living with HIV who are charged with prostitution.

“Many people do not know that there have been significant strides in the prevention, testing, and treatment of HIV,” said Rusch. “HIV is often treatable with one pill a day, and people living with HIV have the same life expectancy as the average person with proper treatment. Updating these laws to reflect medical advances is critical to basic justice and fairness to all Missourians.”

In 2019, Missouri had roughly 13,000 people living with HIV, according to the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services. Many are in the south central part of the state, includingBates, Cedar, St. Francois, Hickory, Wayne, Ozark, Wright, Iron, Madison, Reynolds, Ripley, Crawford and Washington counties.

Empower Missouri staffs the Missouri HIV Justice Coalition and welcomes participation by people living with HIV. Details may be found at: https://empowermissouri.org/hiv-justice-coalition/.

Published on Dec 3, 2020 in the Missouri Times

Lawmakers promote legislation to ‘decriminalize HIV’ on World AIDS Day

Rep. Phil Christofanelli and incoming Sens. Holly Rehder and Greg Razer pre-filed legislation to change Missouri’s laws regarding people with HIV on World AIDS Day Tuesday.

“It’s special that we get to file our bills on this day,” Rehder told The Missouri Times. “We’ve had so many advancements in HIV treatment since the 80s when our statutes were put in place, and medical professionals, researchers, and scientists know so much more about it now than they did. Living with HIV is not a death sentence any longer, and it’s incredibly important to remove the stigma.”

The legislators joined a virtual press conference with multiple advocacy groups Tuesday, where Rehder outlined her planned legislation. She said she will sponsor a “harm reduction package” which includes establishing a statewide Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), ensures safe syringe access, and modernizes the state’s HIV regulations. The provisions were staples of her tenure in the House.

Current Missouri statute mandates an individual who is knowingly infected with HIV not act in a “reckless” way that could expose another person to the disease without his or her knowledge or consent. Violating the statute could result in a Class A or B felony, depending on if another individual contracted HIV.

The way the statute is written deters people from finding out his or her status and seeking appropriate treatment, advocates say. The statute also suggests an HIV diagnosis is equivalent to a death sentence, but Rehder said modern medicine tells a different story.

The bill would update the language to reflect more recent research on the disease since the law was enacted in the 1980s, including removing spitting from the list of “reckless” actions.

Christofanelli said he would sponsor two HIV-related bills in the lower chamber next year, including a similar modernization provision.

“I think that we need to let people know that while science has not yet found a way to cure HIV, we certainly have the tools at our disposal to end HIV if we take the correct actions,” Christofanelli said. “To that end, I intend to file two pieces of legislation in the upcoming session in order to put Missouri at the forefront of preventing the spread of HIV in our communities and helping those afflicted with the disease.”

The other piece would concern Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PREP), relatively new treatments for the disease. The bill would allow pharmacists to screen patients and prescribe the treatment over-the-counter. Now, patients must make a doctor’s appointment to receive a prescription for PREP which could cause them to receive it past the critical three-day exposure period. The bill would also allow patients to receive a 30-day prescription of PEP after receiving a negative test for HIV. He said the use of the treatments greatly reduced the risk of contracting HIV.

Razer said he would be handling the bill on the Senate side.

“Our state’s HIV-specific law was originally passed in the late ’80s, when our cultural understanding of HIV was informed by fear and stigma,” Missouri HIV Justice Organizer Molly Pearson said. “Thanks to advances in modern medicine, people living with HIV can live long, healthy lives without transmitting the virus. Using criminalization as a public health intervention simply does not work, and it upholds the stigma and fear of HIV that got us here in the first place.”

World AIDS Day has been observed on Dec. 1 every year since 1988. The day was set aside to educate the public about the disease and examine the future of the fight against it.

Tuesday was also the first day of pre-filing for the Missouri legislature.

WATCH HIV Justice Live! (Ep 4): How to advocate for prosecutorial guidance for HIV-related cases

The fourth episode of HIV Justice Network’s web show, HIV Justice Live! that streamed live on July 14 is now available to watch on YouTube. The episode, which our colleagues at the HIV Legal Network called a “master class in advocacy” discussed the newly launched UNDP’s Guidance for Prosecutors on HIV-related criminal cases and provided insights into how to work with prosecutorial authorities so that they have a clear understanding of how to – and more importantly how not to – use HIV criminalisation laws.

Guidance like this is a good example of a ‘harm reduction’ approach if you can’t change or repeal HIV criminalisation laws, and adopting such guidance can result in fewer miscarriages of justice, as well as improve the criminal legal system’s understand of, and approach to, people living with HIV. Once implemented it’s also a good way of holding prosecutors to account.

The Guidance was developed for UNDP by our HIV JUSTICE WORLDWIDE colleagues, Richard Elliott and Cécile Kazatchkine of the HIV Legal Network. The process, which took two years, involved multiple consultations. Several other colleagues, including HJN’s Executive Director Edwin J Bernard, HJN Supervisory Board member Lisa Power, and HJN Global Advisory Panel member Edwin Cameron were part of the Project Advisory Committee.

The episode, hosted by Edwin J Bernard and featuring UNDP’s Kene Esom alongside Lisa Power and Richard Elliott, also included a special edit of HJN’s documentary, “Doing HIV Justice”, which demystifies the process of how civil society worked with the Crown Prosecution Service of England and Wales to create the world’s first policy and guidance for prosecuting the reckless or intentional transmission of sexual infection.

The full-length, 30-minute version of this documentary is now available as part of a YouTube playlist that also features two other educational and informative videos: an introduction by the CPS’s Arwel Jones with some useful tips about how to engage with prosecutors, and a workshop that took place after the world premiere screening in Berlin, featuring Lisa Power and Catherine Murphy (who helped advocate for the implementation of guidance in England & Wales, and Scotland, respectively) as well as former UNAIDS Senior Human Rights and Law Adviser, Susan Timberlake.

Russia: Migrants workers to undergo HIV testing every 3 months

Labor migrants in Russia will be obliged to take a PCR test every 72 hours and tests for HIV and other infectious diseases every three months

Automatic google translation – For original article in Russian, please scroll down

On July 1, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a federal law on state fingerprint registration of visa-free foreign citizens in Russia.

According to the law, visa-free foreigners will now have to undergo fingerprinting, photographing and medical examination without fail within 90 calendar days from the date of entry. They will be given a corresponding document.

And labor migrants will have to go through all these procedures within 30 days. They will be required to confirm the absence of HIV infection, infectious diseases that pose a danger to others, as well as drug addiction.

Moreover, if they are diagnosed with drug addiction or HIV infection, then “a decision will be made about the undesirability of their stay in Russia.” Failure to comply with this law threatens to reduce the length of stay of foreigners in Russia.

The law will come into force in December.

Human rights activist Valentina Chupik explained that according to this law, migrants will have to take PCR tests to detect coronavirus every 72 hours, as well as do tests for other infectious diseases every three months.

“I suppose that after this story not a single legal migrant will remain in Russia. For example, I will not be able to spend 1950 rubles every three days on a PCR test. […] As far as I understand, the one who signed these laws did not even read them. Well, he hasn’t read them for years. And the one who made these laws has no idea about Russian legislation and about migration statistics, ”said the human rights activist.

She sent a letter to the President of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev asking for help in this situation and urged migrants from other countries to also appeal to their authorities. She believes that in this way the Russian authorities “will pay attention to what they have done in the field of migration law and get down to business.”

Трудовых мигрантов в России обяжут сдавать ПЦР-тест каждые 72 часа и тесты на ВИЧ и другие инфекционные заболевания каждые три месяца

Президент России Владимир Путин 1 июля подписал федеральный закон о государственной дактилоскопической регистрации безвизовых иностранных граждан в России.

Согласно закону, безвизовые иностранцы теперь должны будут проходить дактилоскопическую регистрацию, фотографирование и медосмотр в обязательном порядке в течение 90 календарных дней со дня въезда. Им будет выдаваться соответствующий документ.

*Дактилоскопическая регистрация — сдача отпечатков пальцев.

А трудовые мигранты должны будут пройти все эти процедуры в течение 30 дней. Они будут обязаны подтвердить отсутствие ВИЧ-инфекции, инфекционных заболеваний, которые представляют опасность для окружающих, а также наркотической зависимости.

При этом, если у них выявят наркоманию или ВИЧ-инфекцию, то «будет приниматься решение о нежелательности их пребывания на территории России». Несоблюдение этого закона грозит сокращением срока пребывания иностранцев в России.

Закон вступит в силу уже в декабре.

Правозащитница Валентина Чупик пояснила, что согласно этому закону, мигранты будут должны сдавать ПЦР-тесты на выявление коронавируса каждые 72 часа, а также каждые три месяца делать тесты на другие инфекционные заболевания.

«Я так предполагаю, что после этой истории ни одного легального мигранта в России не останется. Я, например, не потяну тратить каждые три дня 1950 рублей на ПЦР-тест. […] Я так понимаю, что тот кто подписывал эти законы, их даже не читал. Ну он их уже много лет не читает. А тот, кто производил эти законы понятия не имеет о российском законодательстве и о статистике миграции», — заявила правозащитница.

Она направила письмо к президенту Узбекистана Шавкату Мирзиееву с просьбой о помощи в этой ситуации и призвала мигрантов из других стран также обратиться к своим властям. Она считает, что таким образом власти России «обратят внимание на то, что они понаделали в сфере миграционного права и займутся делом».

Russia: Migrants are forming a “hidden epidemic” because they are afraid to seek help

Why are migrants living with HIV being deported from Russia?

Automated translation – For article in Russian, please scroll down.

Russia is one of 19 countries that deport migrants living with HIV. Migrants, in turn, prefer not to return to their homeland and remain in the country illegally. For fear of being discovered, they do not seek medical attention until they feel very sick. Experts believe that in this way migrants not only risk their health, but also exacerbate the situation with HIV in the country, writes RIA Novosti.

Where it all started

In 1995, the Law on Preventing the Spread of HIV was passed, stating that migrants who have been diagnosed with HIV should be deported. In 2015, the law was amended: it is forbidden to expel from the country foreigners whose relatives are Russian citizens.

Despite the fact that it is possible to take a status test in Russia anonymously, migrants who want to obtain citizenship or a patent in order to work officially must provide the results of an HIV test. The data is automatically sent to Rospotrebnadzor, then the relevant commission makes a decision on the “undesirability of stay”, after which the foreign citizen must leave the country within one month.

In this regard, the number of migrants who have decided to “lay low” in order not to return to their homeland is growing: many have jobs here, a stable income, families and relatives.

Hidden epidemic

In February, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova announced that there were 1.1 million people living with HIV in Russia. According to Rospotrebnadzor, migrants, who make up almost 2 million, account for more than 39,000 cases. Most of them are citizens of Tajikistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. These are only official statistics. According to Vadim Pokrovsky, with existing methods of fighting infection, the number of people living with HIV by 2030 could double.

Experts believe that migrants are forming a “hidden epidemic”: many are in the country illegally, do not accept treatment, because they are afraid to seek help. They try not to leave Russia, because they will not be allowed back because of their status.

According to Vadim Pokrovsky, under current methods of combating infection the number of people living with HIV by 2030 can grow by half.

Expert opinion

Daniil Kashnitsky, Academic Relations Coordinator of the Regional Expert Group on Migrant Health, believes that the law passed in 1995 is long out of date. Over the past few decades, drugs have been developed that allow people living with HIV to live full lives, have an undetectable viral load and have healthy babies. And because of the existing discrimination, migrants “hide” and do not have access to quality medicine. Many of them are ready to purchase treatment at their own expense, but due to being on the “unwanted list”, they cannot legally stay in Russia.

Experts from the Regional Expert Group on Migrant Health are confident that this problem can be solved by refusing deportation and reaching certain agreements with the CIS countries.

Почему из России депортируют мигрантов, живущих с ВИЧ?

Россия является одной из 19 стран, которые депортируют мигрантов, живущих с ВИЧ. Мигранты, в свою очередь, предпочитают не возвращаться на родину и остаются в стране нелегально. Из страха быть обнаруженными они не обращаются за медицинской помощью до тех пор, пока не станет совсем плохо. Специалисты считают, что таким образом мигранты не только рискуют своим здоровьем, но и усугубляют ситуацию с ВИЧ в стране, пишет РИА Новости.

Откуда все началось

В 1995 году был принят закон «О предупреждении распространения ВИЧ», сообщающий, что мигранты, у которых выявили ВИЧ, должны быть депортированы. В 2015 году закон был скорректирован: запрещено высылать из страны иностранцев, у которых родственники являются гражданами России.

Несмотря на то, что пройти тест на наличие статуса в России можно анонимно, мигранты, которые хотят получить гражданство или патент, чтобы работать официально, должны предоставить результаты анализа на ВИЧ. Данные автоматически попадают в Роспотребнадзор, затем соответствующая комиссия принимает решение о «нежелательности пребывания», после чего иностранный гражданин должен покинуть страну в течение одного месяца.

В связи с этим растет количество мигрантов, которые решили «залечь на дно», чтобы не возвращаться на родину: у многих здесь работа, стабильный доход, семьи и родственники.

Скрытая эпидемия

В феврале вице-премьер РФ Татьяна Голикова сообщила о том, что в России зафиксировано 1,1 млн людей, живущих с ВИЧ. По данным Роспотребнадзора, на мигрантов, которые составляют почти 2 млн, приходится более 39 000 случаев. Большую часть составляют граждане Таджикистана, Украины и Узбекистана. Это только официальная статистика. По словам Вадима Покровского, при существующих методах борьбы с инфекцией количество людей, живущих с ВИЧ, к 2030 году может вырасти вдвое.

Эксперты считают, что мигранты формируют «скрытую эпидемию»: многие находятся в стране нелегально, не принимают лечение, так как боятся обратиться за помощью. Они стараются не выезжать из России, потому что обратно их не пустят из-за статуса.

По словам Вадима Покровского, при существующих методах борьбы с инфекцией количество людей, живущих с ВИЧ, к 2030 году может вырасти вдвое.

Мнение экспертов

Даниил Кашницкий, координатор по академическим связям Региональной экспертной группы по здоровью мигрантов, считает, что закон, принятый в 1995 году уже давно устарел. За последние несколько десятилетий разработаны препараты, которые позволяют людям, живущим с ВИЧ, жить полноценной жизнью, иметь неопределяемую вирусную нагрузку и рожать здоровых детей. А из-за существующей дискриминации мигранты «прячутся» и не имеют доступа к качественной медицине. Многие из них готовы приобретать лечение за свой счет, но из-за попадания в «нежелательный список», они не могут легально находиться в России.

Специалисты из Региональной экспертной группы по здоровью мигрантов уверены, что эту проблему можно решить, отказавшись от депортации, и достигнув определенных договоренностей со странами СНГ.

A landmark week for HIV criminalisation

This past week has seen a huge amount of activity related to HIV and, specifically, HIV criminalisation.

Illinois is about to become only the second US state ever to completely repeal its HIV criminalisation law which has been on the books since 1989.

Meanwhile, Nevada has modernised its HIV criminalisation law, and in Michigan a county prosecutor has ordered a review of all prosecutions brought under the state’s law before it was modernised in 2019.

All of these successes were celebrated at the HIV is not a Crime Training Academy (HINAC4) that took place virtually last week and helped galvanise activists working for HIV, racial and gender justice across the US, even as there was disappointment that the High-Level Meeting on HIV/AIDS, which took place at the same time, ended up adopting a joint Political Declaration that was lacking in global consensus, with both watered-down language on human rights and some key issues completely missing.

HIV criminalisation survivor Kerry Thomas, currently incarcerated in Idaho, speaking from prison at HINAC4. Although Kerry has been able to present by phone at previous international events, this is the first time anyone has been able to both see and hear Kerry.

Despite back and forth among the countries, with opposition from Russia, Belarus, Nicaragua, and the Syrian Arab Republic to the final draft’s progressive language, such as naming ‘key populations’, the Declaration did include language on HIV criminalisation as part of the 10-10-10 targets on societal enablers calling for member states to end all inequalities faced by people living with HIV, key and other priority populations by 2025.

Specifically, the Declaration “express[es] deep concern about stigma, discrimination, violence, and restrictive and discriminatory laws and practices that target people living with, at risk of and affected by HIV – including for non-disclosure, exposure, and transmission of HIV…” and “commit[s] to eliminating HIV-related stigma and discrimination, and to respecting, protecting and fulfilling the human rights of people living with, at risk of and affected by HIV…by creating an enabling legal environment by reviewing and reforming, as needed, restrictive legal and policy frameworks including discriminatory laws and practices that create barriers or reinforce stigma and discrimination such as … laws related to HIV non-disclosure, exposure, and transmission.”

Still, even as we celebrate some of these progressive commitments, much work needs to be done. Advocates and organisations have voiced their concerns that the watered-down Declaration may not fully commit countries to take action.

France: Blood donations to meet the same health safety requirements, regardless of one’s sexuality

Blood donation: The end of the distinction between gay and straight promised for 2022

Translated from French with Deepl.com – For original article, please scroll down

The French National Assembly has passed an amendment allowing gay & bisexual men to donate blood under the same conditions as heterosexual men. The measure is due to come into force in 2022.
Are we heading towards the end of discrimination? This Tuesday evening, the National Assembly voted on an amendment to the bioethics bill concerning blood donation. At the request of the government, parliamentarians lifted the abstinence period still required for men who have sex with men (MSM), whether gay or bisexual. According to our information, the reform will come into force on 1 January 2022.

“The criteria for selecting donors (…) may not be based on any difference in treatment, in particular with regard to the sex of the partner or partners with whom the donors have had a sexual relationship,” says the amendment to Article 7 bis of the bioethics bill. Currently, in order to pass the screening process at the French Blood Establishment (EFS), MSM must have previously respected a four-month period of abstinence, effectively excluding many of them from donating blood.

Blood donation and HIV (over)risk
The Minister of Health publicly welcomed the vote. “Giving blood will meet the same health safety requirements, regardless of one’s sexuality. Parliament has just voted in principle. I will align the donor selection criteria in the coming months,” he wrote on Twitter.

However, a year ago, Olivier Véran considered it “dangerous” to go through the law to put an end to this discrimination, considering that it “is really not the right tool”. At the time, the left and the right were defending an amendment to this effect. “There is a serological window, a few days during which a person can be contaminated without being detected (…). Statistically, there is an excess risk (among MSM), not because of sexuality but because of a practice,” the minister argued in July 2020, quoted by HuffPost.

Olivier Véran therefore pleaded for the reduction of the abstinence period to be carried out by regulation (i.e. by executive decree), so that it could be reinstated in the event of a problem: “If there were a situation, which would not even be linked to HIV, but which would oblige us to put in place emergency measures to protect recipients and donors, we would no longer be able to do so (otherwise).

A major difference
However, the new version voted by the Assembly contains a difference that changes everything. The amendment states that donor selection criteria may not be based on discrimination “not justified by the need to protect the donor or the recipient”. A possibility is left open to reconsider the donor selection criteria. “This wording is an open door to differential treatment. I have the feeling that the government wants to give pledges but cannot go all the way”, analysed for TÊTU the PS deputy Hervé Saulignac, who brought the initial amendment.

This year, it was not Olivier Véran who argued in the Assembly but Adrien Taquet, Secretary of State for Child Protection. “The Minister of Health had undertaken to present new elements. (…) The residual risk of HIV among blood donors has decreased considerably in recent years. Santé Publique France now estimates it at 1 in 11.6 million donations,” he said.

Following the British model, which will start next week, a new non-discriminatory questionnaire will be offered to donors. From 14 June in the UK, donation will be open to people who have had the same sexual partner for three months, who have not had a recent exposure to an STI or who are PrEP users. In France, “these changes can be implemented from the beginning of next year”, the Secretary of State promised. Contacted by TÊTU, the Ministry of Health gave a date: 1 January 2022.

Don du sang : la fin de la distinction entre gay et hétéro promise pour 2022

L’Assemblée nationale a voté un amendement autorisant les hommes gays et bis à donner leur sang dans les mêmes conditions que les hétéros. La mesure doit entrer en application en 2022.

Se dirige-t-on vers la fin d’une discrimination ? Ce mardi 8 juin au soir, l’Assemblée nationale a voté un amendement au projet de loi bioéthique concernant le don du sang. Sur demande du gouvernement, les parlementaires ont levé la durée d’abstinence toujours demandée aux hommes qui ont des relations sexuelles avec des hommes (HSH), qu’ils soient gays ou bis. Selon nos informations, la réforme entrera en vigueur le 1er janvier 2022.

“Les critères de sélection des donneurs (…) ne peuvent être fondés sur aucune différence de traitement, notamment en ce qui concerne le sexe du ou des partenaires avec lequel les donneurs auraient entretenus une relation sexuelle”, indique l’amendement à l’article 7 bis du projet de loi bioéthique. Actuellement, pour pouvoir passer la sélection opérée lors d’un rendez-vous à l’Établissement français du sang (EFS), les HSH doivent avoir respecté au préalable une période d’abstinence de quatre mois, excluant de fait bon nombre d’entre eux du don du sang.

Don du sang et (sur-)risque de VIH

Le ministre de la Santé s’est félicité publiquement du vote. “Donner son sang répondra aux mêmes impératifs de sécurité sanitaire, et ce quelle que soit sa sexualité. Le parlement vient d’en voter le principe. J’alignerai ainsi les critères de sélection des donneurs dans les prochains mois”, a-t-il écrit sur Twitter.

Pourtant il y a encore un an, Olivier Véran jugeait “dangereux” de passer par la loi pour mettre fin à cette discrimination, considérant que ce “n’est vraiment pas le bon outil”. À l’époque, la gauche défendait main dans la main avec la droite un amendement en ce sens. “Il y a une fenêtre sérologique, quelques jours pendant lesquels une personne peut être contaminée sans que l’on puisse le détecter (…). Statistiquement, il y a un sur-risque (chez les HSH), non pas en raison de la sexualité mais d’une pratique”, faisait valoir le ministre en juillet 2020, cité par le HuffPost.

Olivier Véran plaidait donc pour que la réduction du délai d’abstinence passe plutôt par voie réglementaire (donc par décret de l’exécutif), manière de pouvoir le réinstaller en cas de problème : “S’il y avait une situation, qui n’aurait même pas de lien avec le VIH mais qui nous obligerait à mettre en place des mesures d’urgence pour protéger les receveurs et les donneurs, nous ne pourrions plus le faire (sinon)“.

Une différence de taille

La nouvelle mouture votée par l’Assemblée comporte néanmoins une différence qui change tout. Les critères de sélection des donneurs n’y peuvent être fondés, est-il écrit dans l’amendement, sur une discrimination “non justifiée par la nécessité de protéger le donneur ou le receveur”. Une possibilité laissée ouverte de revenir sur les critères de sélection des donneurs. “Cette formulation est une porte ouverte à une différence de traitement. J’ai le sentiment que le gouvernement souhaite donner des gages mais n’arrive pas à aller jusqu’au bout”, analyse pour TÊTU le député PS Hervé Saulignac, qui a porté l’amendement initial.

Cette année, ce n’est pas Olivier Véran qui a argumenté à l’Assemblée mais Adrien Taquet, secrétaire d’État chargé de la protection de l’enfance. “Le ministre de la Santé s’était engagé à présenter des éléments nouveaux. (…) Le risque résiduel du VIH chez les donneurs de sang a considérablement diminué ces dernières années. Santé Publique France l’évalue maintenant 1 sur 11,6 millions de dons”, a-t-il indiqué.

Sur le modèle britannique, qui s’y met la semaine prochaine, un nouveau questionnaire non discriminant sera proposé aux donneurs. Ainsi à partir du 14 juin outre-Manche, le don sera ouvert aux personnes qui ont eu le même partenaire sexuel pendant trois mois, qui n’ont pas eu d’exposition récente à une IST ou encore, qui sont utilisateurs de la PrEP. En France, “ces évolutions pourront être mises en oeuvre dès le début de l’année prochaine”, a promis le secrétaire d’État. Contacté par TÊTU, le ministère de la Santé donne une date : le 1er janvier 2022.

US: Review of prosecutions under Michigan’s former HIV law leads to motion to dismiss case in Ingham county

Ingham County prosecutor orders review of HIV felony convictions

Ingham County Prosecutor Carol Siemon ordered her team on Friday to review all prosecutions brought by the county under Michigan’s former felony law AIDS — Sexual Penetration with Uninformed Partner. The review found only two prosecutions. One case was dropped, but another, from 1999 remains a pending case.

Siemon has ordered her staff to file a motion refusing prosecution in the case.

“It is inconsistent with my focus on equity and anti-discrimination to charge or prosecute charges under this discriminatory and fear-based statute (the misdemeanor charges that replaced the felony charge in 2019 appropriately requires an individual to specifically intend to transmit their infections by taking actions to transmit it),” wrote in an email to Michigan Advance.

The former felony law criminalized any sexual penetration “however slight” without first disclosing an HIV-positive diagnosis to a partner. The law was adopted in 1988 and went into effect in 1989. Prosecutors were not required to prove an intent to harm in the prosecution, which advocates had called unfair.

She went on, “Certainly, the national racial disparities in who has been charged under similar laws and the additional serious and collateral consequence of potentially having to register under the Sexual Offender Registration Act are very troubling. This means that even a misdemeanor warrant request, if ever received, would be scrutinized carefully to ensure that not only could the crime elements be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but that it is overall in the interest of justice to do so.”

Siemon, who has come under pressure from victim’s families for what they perceive as her soft on criminal’s approach to justice, said the review and subsequent action to decline prosecution were motivated after reading Advance’s story about the struggle of Jeremy Merithew. Merithew was convicted under the old felony law, updated in 2019, and spent years in prison. He was ordered to enroll on the sex offender list for 25 years. He is attempting to get a pardon from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

[Update]US: Nevada Governor signs law that will modernise HIV laws in line with other communicable diseases

Governor Sisolak Signs into Law Legislation Modernizing Nevada’s HIV Laws

HENDERSON, NV – Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak today signed into law landmark legislation to reform outdated Nevada laws that criminalized and stigmatized people living with HIV. Senate Bill (SB) 275 was introduced by Senator Dallas Harris, received bipartisan support in the Senate, and it was supported by a broad alliance of advocacy groups, public health professionals, civil rights organizations and health care providers including Silver State Equality, Nevada’s statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, and a partner of the Nevada HIV Modernization Coalition.

Senate Bill (SB) 275, introduced by Sen. Dallas Harris, won approval with a unanimous vote in the Nevada Senate and by a 26-15 vote in the Assembly. The bill moved to the Governor for his signature.

On the importance of signing the bill into law Governor Sisolak said:

“Nevada is known as a warm and welcoming place for all– in our State, we celebrate our diversity. I am so grateful to sign legislation to ensure that our LGBTQ+ community feels safe, protected and can continue to grow and flourish in the Silver State. Senate Bill 275, sponsored by Senator Harris and presented in partnership with André Wade and former Senator David Parks, modernizes Nevada’s HIV criminal laws and reestablishes the Advisory Task Force on HIV Exposure Modernization for the 2021-2022 Legislative Interim. We know that laws that criminalize people living with HIV don’t stop the spread, but they actually hurt our public health efforts.”

Silver State Equality released the following statement from State Director André C. Wade:

“Today, Nevada recognizes HIV as a public health issue, not a criminal one. issue. With his signature, Governor Sisolak has moved Nevada HIV laws into the 21st century by aligning them with modern science, ultimately helping to reduce stigma and discrimination against people living with HIV. When people are no longer penalized for knowing their status, it encourages them to come forward, get tested and get treatment. That’s good for all Nevadans. The HIV epidemic will end not by threatening people with criminal prosecution, but instead, by encouraging people to get tested, and by providing them access to care. Today’s signing is especially great news for Nevada communities of color and members of the LGBTQ+ community, who are disproportionately impacted by HIV.”

Senator Dallas Harris, Co-Chair of the Advisory Task Force on HIV Exposure Modernization, said:

“Nevada state law will no longer discourage Nevadans from getting tested for HIV. With the Governor’s signature today, we are helping to reduce the stigma that keeps some from learning their HIV status and getting treatment. I want to thank Governor Sisolak for his actions that are keeping Nevada at the forefront in the fight to stop the spread of HIV. Much work remains to be done, but I’m optimistic that eventually these discriminatory criminal laws targeting those living with HIV will be eliminated throughout the country.”

Statement from the Co-Chairs of the Nevada HIV Modernization Coalition – Connie Shearer, Chris Reynolds, and Stephan Page:

“The Nevada HIV Modernization Coalition members would like to thank Senators David Parks and Dallas Harris for their unwavering commitment to modernizing Nevada’s laws that were stigmatizing and harmful. The passing of SB275 is a great step forward toward ending the unwarranted criminalization of people living with HIV in Nevada and it supports science. This in turn supports and promotes public health for all Nevadans.”

A Statement from Connie Shearer, Co-Chair Nevada HIV Modernization Coalition:

The Elizabeth Taylor AIDS Foundation issued the following statement:

“The Elizabeth Taylor AIDS Foundation salutes Governor Sisolak for signing much needed legislative reform for people living with HIV represented in SB 275. We are grateful for the leadership of Senator Harris in championing this bill. We congratulate the Nevada HIV Modernization Coalition and Silver State Equality for their hard work in achieving this long-awaited reform. With the voice of our founder, Elizabeth Taylor, we stand with all organizations throughout the country who are striving to reform these discriminatory laws. We are appreciative for the opportunity to have been of support in Nevada.”

For more information, visit www.silverstateequality.org/hiv.

Published on May 26, 2021, in GlobeNewsWire

Nevada Legislature Passes Bill to Modernize State’s HIV Laws

Garnering bipartisan support, legislation will fix Nevada’s outdated, ineffective, discriminatory HIV criminal laws.

CARSON CITY, Nev., May 26, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —

Silver State Equality, Nevada’s statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization and a partner of the Nevada HIV Modernization Coalition, praised Nevada legislators Wednesday for their bipartisan passage of legislation that modernizes Nevada’s HIV criminal laws.

Senate Bill (SB) 275, introduced by Sen. Dallas Harris, won approval with a unanimous vote in the Nevada Senate and by a 26-15 vote in the Assembly. The bill now moves to the Governor for his signature.

The bill repeals a Nevada statute that makes it a felony for someone who has tested positive for HIV to intentionally, knowingly or willfully engage in conduct that is intended or likely to transmit the disease. Repealing that statute means a person who has contracted HIV and who engaged in such behavior would instead be given a warning as their first offense and, after a second offense, would be guilty of a misdemeanor — a punishment that is consistent with the treatment of other communicable diseases.

The bipartisan show of support impressed HIV activists who have been advocating for years to reform state laws that criminalize HIV with the goal of ensuring they are sync with advances in modern medicine that make transmission of the virus impossible.

Silver State Equality released the following statement from State Director André C. Wade, who — along with Sen. Harris — serves as Co-Chair of the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services’ Advisory Task Force on HIV Exposure Modernization:

“We are extremely pleased with the passage of SB 275 via a strong bipartisan vote. This action will advance the fight against HIV transmission and help to remove HIV stigma that was perpetuated by outdated criminal laws that discouraged disclosure, and thereby testing, treatment and the use of other preventative measures. Even though changing these outdated, ineffective and discriminatory laws is simply common-sense progress, this is a huge move in the right direction. Its passage shows that the years of advocating around this issue are paying off. Our legislators and Nevada citizenry are beginning to understand that the old laws were born out of an era when evidence-based knowledge about HIV risk, transmission and treatment were exceedingly limited. Thank you to the Nevada Legislature, especially Senator Dallas Harris, who authored SB275, and for keeping Nevada at the forefront of LGBTQ+ and civil rights reform.”

Senator Harris, Co-Chair of the Advisory Task Force on HIV Exposure Modernization, said:

“The bipartisan passage of this bill reverses practices that were put in place during the 1980s AIDS epidemic and have proven ineffective and counterproductive from a public health perspective. The old laws also disproportionately affected already marginalized groups, including people of color and LGBTQ+ people. Passage of SB275 helps to remove the statutory stigma that was intentionally placed into our laws that’s done nothing but harm to those who contracted HIV.”

According to a recent report by the UCLA Williams Institute, which analyzed data from the state of Nevada, between 2011 and 2020, arrests for HIV crimes were double the amount from the previous decade and arrests for HIV crimes fell disproportionately on black Nevadans. Black people are 10 percent of Nevada’s population and 28 percent of people living with HIV in the state, but 40 percent of those who have been arrested for HIV crimes.

Connie Shearer, Co-Chair of the Nevada HIV Modernization Coalition said:

“While it’s true that the majority of arrests under HIV criminal laws are reduced or dismissed, the outdated laws continued to perpetuate misinformation and antiquated myths, fears and opinions about HIV and how it is spread. With the passage of SB275, the Nevada Legislature chose science over outdated and irrational fear.”

For more information, visit www.silverstateequality.org/hiv

Published on March 23, 2021 in The Nevada Independent

Democratic Senator seeks overhaul of HIV laws she says will help remove stigma

Sen. Dallas Harris (D-Las Vegas) has introduced a bill that would modernize the state’s laws on human immunodeficiency virus by treating HIV in the same way as other communicable diseases.

The bill aims to reverse practices established decades ago during the height of the AIDS epidemic — when little was known about HIV and AIDS — that have disproportionately affected already marginalized groups, including people of color and LGBTQ+ people.

“The priority for me is equality,” Harris said. “The goal is to remove the statutory stigma that was intentionally placed into our laws all the way across the country that’s done nothing but harm to those who have contracted HIV.”

The bill, SB275, would repeal a Nevada statute that makes it a felony for someone who has tested positive for HIV to intentionally, knowingly or willfully engage in conduct that is intended or likely to transmit the disease. Repealing that statute would mean a person who has contracted HIV and who engaged in such behavior would instead be given a warning as their first offense and, after a second offense, would be guilty of a misdemeanor — a punishment that is in line with the treatment of other communicable diseases, such as chlamydia and SARS.

“These laws were written back in the ‘80s and ‘90s,” said André Wade, chair of the state’s Advisory Task Force on HIV Exposure Modernization. “Whenever there’s a specific call out of HIV, instead of including it as a communicable disease … then that, in and of itself, is stigmatizing.”

Wade, who also serves as the state director for Silver State Equality, an LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, explained that modernizing the laws is important because HIV is treated as though it is different and worse than other communicable diseases, even though it is not.

In 2019, the state’s HIV/AIDS Surveillance Program found that 11,769 Nevadans were living with HIV, with 27.6 percent of that group identified as Black, even though Black Nevadans comprise just 10.3 percent of the state’s population.

Laws criminalizing HIV arose at a time when little was known about the virus and treatment of the disease. However, as medicine has advanced, prevention medications have been created that eliminate the risk of HIV transmission. And public health experts have also learned that the virus does not spread through saliva, tears or sweat, or by hugging, shaking hands, sharing toilets or sharing dishes.

Samuel Garrett-Pate, communications director for Silver State Equality, said that outdated HIV laws have actually made it more difficult to contain the spread of the virus because of the stigma associated with the laws.

“We recognize that not only have these laws not worked to protect people from the transmission of HIV,” Garrett-Pate said. “They’ve actually been counterproductive … They actually discourage testing. They discourage people from learning their status. They discourage people from disclosing their status.”

Harris said she wants to encourage more testing, and an important step in doing that is removing discriminatory language in the law. Her HIV modernization bill includes provisions to update the language around HIV and other communicable diseases and to ensure that people living with HIV are referred to more respectfully in state laws.

Harris also noted the importance of ensuring equality for all through the bill, including for sex workers and inmates. The bill would repeal a Nevada statute that allows for the segregation of inmates who have tested positive for HIV — which would codify into law a directive from a February settlement between the Department of Justice and the Nevada Department of Corrections that banned the segregation practice.

The bill is also aimed at addressing the spread of communicable diseases as a public health matter, rather than through criminalization.

Existing law allows health authorities to take certain action to investigate and control the spread of communicable disease, including ordering a person to be examined for the presence of a disease and ordering the isolation, quarantine or treatment of a person.

The bill would require any such order to include the reasons why the ordered actions are necessary to prevent, suppress or control the communicable disease.

The initiatives come largely from the work of Silver State Equality and the HIV task force.

The task force — established in the 2019 session through SB284, a bill that was sponsored by now termed-out Sen. David Parks (D-Las Vegas) — was created to address stigma surrounding HIV and to update HIV laws in Nevada based on how the public health understanding of the virus has advanced over previous decades.

Since its commencement, the task force has worked to create a report ahead of the current session that includes many of the recommendations realized in Harris’s bill. And with a provision in the bill that would re-establish the task force for the 2021-22 legislative interim, the task force could continue its work on understanding how Nevada’s HIV laws affect those who have contracted the virus.

Wade and Harris both acknowledged that there is more work to be done beyond what made it into the bill, but Wade said he thinks that the bill does most of what he and the task force sought to accomplish.

Harris said she has another bill, SB211, that would require primary care providers to offer STD and HIV testing to anyone aged 15 and older and that would work in tandem with SB275.

“Testing, testing, testing, right. If we learned anything from coronavirus, it’s, ‘go get tested,’” Harris said. “So that’s another piece. I’m hoping that’s going to work together with this modernization bill to break down some of those barriers.”

The HIV modernization bill is scheduled for its first hearing during a meeting of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee on Thursday. Harris said she expects a positive response.

“I expect it to be well received,” Harris said. “The task force has done a lot of the groundwork on this… This is a result of months and months and multiple meetings with law enforcement, with [district attorney] aides, with communities of those who are living with HIV… with our health departments, with all of the stakeholders at the table.”

The Nevada Independent is a 501(c)3 nonprofit news organization. We are committed to transparency and disclose all our donors. The following people or entities mentioned in this article are financial supporters of our work:
$291.76

Mexico: Arrest of a man in Mexico City for allegedly hiding HIV from his partner sparks harsh criticism

Controversy in Mexico over arrest of man who hid his HIV status from his partner

Translated with www.DeepL.com. For article in Spanish, please scroll down.

The arrest in Mexico City of a man for allegedly hiding the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) from his girlfriend sparked controversy on social networks and harsh criticism of the Mexico City District Attorney’s Office on Friday.

The Mexico City Attorney General’s Office reported that its agents served a warrant for the arrest of a person identified as Juan “N” for “the possible commission of the crime of danger of contagion” and transferred him to the capital’s Reclusorio Norte.

“In August 2019, the victim found, in the home of the person arrested today, medicines to treat a transmissible disease, a condition that he had not told her about, so, considering herself at risk of being infected, she filed a complaint,” the Public Prosecutor’s Office said.

The arrest provoked the rejection of users on social networks such as Eduardo Martínez, who said: “This is how the disregard for human rights of the Mexico City Public Prosecutor’s Office is made evident”.

“Now people living with HIV, even if they are on treatment and undetectable, are going to jail? How strong,” said another internet user named David.

While activist Alaín Pinzón, director of the organisation VIHve Libre, claimed that “living with HIV is not a crime” and added: “if they want to lock us up, let them do it to all of us”.

Members of his organisation also rallied in front of the headquarters of the capital’s Public Prosecutor’s Office to protest against what they saw as the criminalisation of HIV.

They painted the walls of the building with the acronym HIV and carried banners with slogans such as “My HIV does not make me a criminal”.

And they reminded people that a person with HIV who is on medication and has an undetectable viral load does not transmit the virus.

Following the controversy, the capital’s Public Prosecutor’s Office issued a statement in which it expressed “its deepest and most heartfelt respect for any person, regardless of their health condition or medical diagnosis, and in particular, for those living with HIV”.

The agency said it does not intend to “criminalise any person” and justified that it limited itself to complying with “an arrest warrant issued by a supervisory judge” and to proceed “in defence of the complainant”.

The Prosecutor’s Office was also in favour of “reviewing and modifying the legislation that discriminates against HIV status”, something that depends on the legislature.

Polémica en México por arresto de hombre que escondió a su pareja por tener VIH

La detención en Ciudad de México de un hombre por presuntamente haber ocultado a su novia tener el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH) provocó este viernes polémica en redes sociales y duras críticas contra la Fiscalía capitalina.

La Fiscalía General de Justicia de la Ciudad de México informó que sus agentes cumplieron una orden judicial de detención contra una persona identificada como Juan “N” por “la posible comisión del delito de peligro de contagio” y lo trasladaron al Reclusorio Norte de la capital.

“En agosto de 2019 la agraviada encontró, en el domicilio del hoy aprehendido, medicamentos para tratar una enfermedad transmisible, padecimiento que él no le había comentado, por lo que al considerarse en riesgo de ser infectada realizó la denuncia”, detalló el Ministerio Público.

El arresto provocó el rechazo de usuarios en redes sociales como Eduardo Martínez, quien dijo: “Así es cómo se deja en evidencia el desprecio por los derechos humanos de la Fiscalía de la Ciudad de México”.

“Ahora las personas que viven con VIH aun cuando estén en tratamiento, siendo indetectables, ¿van a la cárcel? Qué fuerte”, expresó otro internauta llamado David.

Mientras que el activista Alaín Pinzón, director de la organización VIHve Libre, reivindicó que “vivir con VIH no es delito” y añadió: “si nos quieren encerrar, háganlo con todas”.

Asimismo, miembros de su organización se concentraron frente una sede de la Fiscalía capitalina para protestar contra lo que consideran la criminalización del VIH.

Pintaron las paredes del edificio con las siglas VIH y portaron pancartas con consignas como “Mi VIH no me hace un delincuente”.

Y recordaron que una persona con VIH medicada y con carga viral indetectable no transmite el virus.

Tras la polémica, el Ministerio Público de la capital emitió un comunicado en el que expresó “su más sentido y profundo respeto hacia cualquier persona, sin importar su condición de salud o diagnóstico médico, y en particular, a quienes viven con VIH”.

El organismo dijo que no pretende “criminalizar a ninguna persona” y justificó que se limitó a cumplir “una orden de aprehensión obsequiada por un juez de control” y a proceder “en defensa de la denunciante”.

Asimismo, la Fiscalía se mostró favorable a “revisar y modificar la legislación que discrimine el estatus serológico de VIH”, algo que depende del Legislativo.

US: LGBTQ groups share mixed feelings on bills that passed or failed through state legislatures in 2021

‘You gasp in relief, you don’t celebrate’

LGBTQ groups share mixed feelings on bills that passed, failed during the session

It’s easy to measure Nevada’s success in passing legislation that enhances LGBTQ protections when compared to the wave of anti-LGBTQ bills, specifically anti-trans proposals, that have been sweeping through state legislatures in 2021.

At least 17 bills were passed around the country that targeted trans youth seeking gender-affirming care and allowed for religious exemptions to providing services to the LGBTQ community — the Human Rights Campaign called 2021 the worst year for anti-LGBTQ legislation.

Meanwhile, Nevada moved in the opposite direction and passed legislation modernizing HIV criminalization laws, enhancing data collection around hate crimes and promoting a more inclusive curriculum.

LGBTQ groups following the legislative process have mixed feelings about the measures lawmakers took.

“So many of the bills are just to be able to gain basic dignity and we’re coming from such a deficit,” said Brooke Maylath, the president of Transgender Allies Group.

Maylath called those victories, including HIV modernizing, “bittersweet,” adding that “you gasp in relief, you don’t celebrate.”

But the bills that failed, she added, hurt more.

While general LGBTQ-inclusive legislation was able to advance, two bills specifically enhancing protections for the gender-diverse community, one to ensure insurance companies cover gender-affirming procedures and another to require the Nevada Department of Corrections to develop policies around protecting and housing transgender inmates, died.

“I’m stunned and bitter. I feel locked out in the cold,” Maylath said. “Part of it is Covid. Not being in the building has hurt everybody equally. For public health reasons, it was very necessary. But there are certain elected officials who are very good about listening to their own interested lobbyists and pay no never mind to those they don’t have a vested interest in.”

Andre Wade, the Nevada state director for Silver State Equality, said while he was proud overall of the work done during the session, “there is still some disappointment” around the bills that failed.

“There are huge implications to trans health and well-being and the treatment of trans people in the criminal justice system,” he said, adding the fact that the bills strengthening those protections “stalled is disheartening and upsetting.”

Nevada, he added, still made progress, which he attributes in part to having at least four openly LGBTQ lawmakers.

“Having 20 LGBTQ specific or inclusive bills from the jump is amazing in and of itself,” he said. “The fact that 50 percent have passed is amazing. The thing that is important is we moved from core nondiscrimination protection bills around public accommodations and employment and were able to get into the nooks and crannies of things affecting people’s everyday lives.”

The biggest difference between Nevada and other states, he added, was that the state didn’t “have to play defense like some other states when it comes to gross anti-trans bills.”

According to the Human Rights Campaign, there were more than 250 bills introduced in state legislatures in 2021 that target the LGBTQ community.

The biggest clump of legislation were anti-trans, including:

35 bills that would ban transgender youth from accessing gender-affirming medical care;
15 bills that would prohibit transgender people from accessing restrooms or lockerrooms consistent with their gender idenity;
69 bills that would prevent transgender youth from participating in sports.

While Nevada didn’t embark on a similar path, groups agreed there is room for improvement.

“Are we better if we’re not looking after the most marginalized Americans?” Maylath asked. “Are we better if we’re denying human dignity to the people we’ve ostracized?”

‘Failed in some areas’

The death of Senate Bill 139, which would have required health insurance policies to cover “the treatment of conditions relating to gender dysphoria, gender incongruence and other disorders of sexual development,” hurts Maylath the most.

Trans and gender-nonconforming people share stories during the bill’s hearing about having to pay out of pocket for affirming procedures a health care provider deemed medically necessary. Procedures included “top surgery,” which includes breast reduction or removal, and voice therapy.

“I consider this common sense legislation,” said Sy Bernabei, the executive director for Gender Justice Nevada. “It makes sense that if there is a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and a doctor says, ‘here are these gender-affirming procedures,’ and (the diagnosis) is rooted in medical care and theory, then why wouldn’t we make it easier for insurance to cover these policies?”

Both Bernabei and Maylath said the legislation could have saved lives.

During testimony for the bill, Bernabei added when transgender and gender-nonconforming people don’t have procedures covered by insurance they are more likely to experience depression or be at-risk of suicide.

Several fiscal notes were attached to the bill essentially dooming the bill’s fate.

Clark County said if the bill expanded coverage for conditions related to gender dysphoria “assuming two reassignment surgeries per year, or one per 10,000 members,” it would cost $1.5 million over two years.

“In a $9 billion budget you can’t find money for gender-affirming procedures, which are actually life-saving procedures,?” Maylath asked, adding that trans people are already paying into insurance plans.

“We pay the same benefits as everybody else yet the lifesaving procedures for us are denied administratively.”

After passing out of the Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor April 2, SB 139 was sent to the Senate Finance committee, chaired by state Sen. Chris Brooks, where it died without another hearing.

Maylath, who presented the legislation alongside bill sponsor state Sen. Melanie Scheible, said she reached out to Brooks multiple times but never received a response.

Senate Bill 258, which would have required NDOC to adopt regulations around housing, heath care and security for transgender inmates, also died.

The hearing included letters from inmates and testimony for attorneys representing transgender inmates who detailed horrific allegations of abuse and sexual assault.

“We’ve got this draconian system that preys on people of color and puts them into subhuman conditions and then denies basic human rights and access to health care and appropriate housing to keep them safe from rape,” Maylath said.

The department attached a $1.3 million fiscal note to the bill. Maylath said the fiscal note was “inflated and unnecessary” and called it “an administrative trick” to keep the bill from going forward.

NDOC also attached a nearly $4 million fiscal note to another one of Scheible’s bills, Senate Bill 22, that caps how much prison officials can deduct from inmate’s accounts.

Brooks scheduled a hearing for the legislation in the Senate Finance Committee, lawmakers challenged the accuracy of the fiscal impact, and the Legislative Counsel Bureau concluded they couldn’t verify the accuracy of the amount. The bill then passed both houses unanimously.

It’s unclear why the same level of scrutiny given to the fiscal note on SB 22 wasn’t given to SB 258.

Maylath said the bill “was about getting the Department of Corrections to properly write transgender and gender variant prisoner policy” so guidelines were consistent across prisons and clear for all corrections officers to understand.

“So for the 30, 40 prisoners they have who are gender variant, (NDOC) wants to continue to not have to change their ways so they can be able to do what they’ve always done, which is applying extrajudicial punishment for people who are different,” she said.

Bernabei wasn’t surprised that those bills didn’t pass, but was still disappointed.

“Even though we have a progressive body right now and some really great lawmakers, we still couldn’t get through what we should have,” they added. “At least we didn’t pass anti-LGBTQ bills, but I feel like we still kind of failed in some areas.”

More voices, more political power

Wade said one of the more significant wins for the LGBTQ community was Senate Bill 275, which modernizes the state’s HIV laws.

“It’s part of a broader movement across the nation with at least nine other states mulling similar legislation,” Wade said.

The legislation repeals a provision in Nevada law that makes it a category B felony for a person who tested positive for HIV from “knowingly or willfully engaging in a manner intended to transmit the disease.”

Laws criminalizing HIV transmission that were put in place during the height of the HIV/AIDS pandemic targeted gay and trans people and don’t reflect the innovations in science and medicine around the disease. Former state Sen. David Parks had worked for years to change those laws.

Again, Maylath said the passage was bittersweet.

“How do you criminalize having a virus?” Maylath said. “It was bad they criminalized it in the first place… Is it room for celebration? I don’t know. How do you celebrate being able to get what’s owed to you on a human dignity basis after having it taken away from you for the past 30 years?”

Wade said it’s hard to undersell the importance of Assembly Bill 261, which creates inclusive curriculum standards that takes into consideration the perspectives and contributions of marginalized communities such as the LGBTQ community, Black, indigenous people of color and immigrants.

“It will allow racial and ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities to see themselves in history books and civic books and for our cisgender, heterosexual peers to see us as well,” Wade said.

Bernabei noted the important step of passing AB 261 especially in contrast to other states that banned “critical race theory” from being taught in schools. While the bill is a good step, they added the implementation process is something to watch.

“What is it going to look like when it’s implemented,” they said. “When we talk about LGBTQ history, are we only going to be celebrating Harvey Milk (the first openly gay elected official in California)? Are we celebrating trans folks who have contributed or people of color in our community? I’m glad it passed, but I’m interested to see what happens with it.”

Other important bills, Wade said, include Senate Bill 237, which designates LGBTQ businesses as minority-owned businesses, and Senate Bill 148, which enhances how Nevada law enforcement tracks and reports hate crimes.

“Our hate crime reporting data, in general, isn’t that great,” Wade said. “But this will allow us to have better data on sexual orientation and gender identity so we can know what the rise of hate crimes look like throughout the state and get reports so we can know how to address the situation.”

Assembly Bill 115 would allow more than two individuals to be legal parents and allows for all consenting parents to share in the duties and responsibilities of raising the child.

“This isn’t just an LGBTQ bill, this is also a step-parent bill. This is a bill for families who need legal protections for modern families,” Wade said.

While there wasn’t a concerted effort to advance anti-LGBTQ legislation in 2021, Bernabei wouldn’t be surprised if the progress made during the session prompted backlash in 2023, especially if Democrats lose seats.

But LGBTQ groups will be ready.

“The good thing about where we’re at is there are more people coming out not because there are more gay and trans people but because it’s safer and more affirming,” Bernabei said. “With more voices, we have more political power.”