LGBTQ+ Civil Rights: Local Government Efforts in a Volatile Era

• Published date: 01 November 2020
• Author: Nicole M. Elias
• Date: 01 November 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13188

LGBTQ+ Civil Rights 1075

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 80, Iss. 6, pp. 1075–1086. © 2020 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.13188.

Nicole M. Elias

City University of New York

LGBTQ+ Civil Rights: Local Government Efforts in a

Volatile Era

Abstract: LGBTQ+ issues at the local level pose some of the most pressing civil rights challenges in the current U.S.

context. This analysis provides insight into what is taking place in major municipalities and how these efforts can be

improved to bolster equity and civil rights for LGBTQ+ populations. At a time when identity, language, and public

sector values are inherently intertwined and constantly changing, the following question is ripe for analysis: how are

major U.S. municipalities addressing the civil rights needs of the LGBTQ+ population? To answer this question,

an analysis of government websites from the top 10 U.S. cities by population is conducted, examining the policies,

programs, and services that municipalities offer LGBTQ+ residents and the language used to frame these policies,

programs, and services as expressions of power, representations of identity, and the website presentation itself.

Evidence for Practice

• Municipalities should adopt comprehensive policies, programs, and services to promote LGBTQ+ civil rights

that take into account the varied needs of their diverse populations.

• The language used in LGBTQ+ policies, programs, and services should be carefully considered, because

language has the potential to build inclusion and trust among administrators and LGBTQ+ residents.

• Municipalities should not only develop more inclusive LGBTQ+ policies, programs, and services but also

work to improve their accessibility and web presence so that knowledge of these efforts is readily available to

LGBTQ+ individuals.

Sex, gender, gender identity, and sexual

orientation are complex topics that are

prompting new policy and administrative

responses within public agencies (Elias 2017). As

the LGBTQ+ population becomes more visible and

salient in public discourse, local, state, and federal

governments are increasingly addressing civil rights

for this population. Often, administrators are faced

with questions of how to create policy and make

decisions based on evolving conceptions of sex and

gender (Elias et al. 2018). Transgender individuals are

especially vulnerable to discrimination and violence

(Bradford et al. 2013; Colvin 2007; Elias and Colvin

2019; Grant et al. 2011; Sellers 2014).

Many U.S. states and municipalities have passed laws

protecting employees on the basis of gender identity,

with “20 states plus the District of Columbia and

Puerto Rico and over 200 municipalities having

some type of gender identity and gender expression

protections for employees in the public or private

sector” (Waterfield 2017). Many municipalities and

states have adopted LGBTQ+ antidiscrimination laws

(see appendix A and appendix B in the Supporting

Information online). For example, New York and

Massachusetts enacted protections for transgender

individuals in public accommodations (Creamer

2018), and New York City passed legislation to allow

gender-neutral options on birth certificates (Sullivan

2018). Yet, despite the LGBTQ+ population’s

unprecedented degree of political and social

acceptance in the current U.S. context, LGBTQ+

individuals are frequently targets of discriminatory

acts and punitive structures and policies in some

jurisdictions.

Many municipalities have no LGBTQ+ protections

or actively legislate against LGBTQ+ civil rights. To

date, 26 states in the United States have no explicit

prohibitions on discrimination based on sexual

orientation or gender identity in state law (Movement

Advancement Project 2018b). In three states

(Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee), cities are

explicitly banned from passing nondiscrimination

provisions that would protect LGBTQ+ people

(Movement Advancement Project 2018a). In this

volatile area of policy, most public administrators

have the latitude to promote civil rights by offering

services and protections, which may originate in any

of the three branches of government at the federal,

Nicole M. Elias is assistant professor

in the Department of Public Management

at John Jay College of Criminal Justice,

City University of New York and codirector

of Women in the Public Sector. Her

research focuses on social equity in

public administration and policy, with an

emphasis on the ethics of administration,

management of human resources, and

policy impacts on different populations.

Her forthcoming work includes two

coedited volumes:

Ethics for Contemporary

Bureaucrats: Navigating Constitutional

Crossroads

and

Handbook of Gender and

Public Administration

.

Email: nelias@jjay.cuny.edu

Research

Symposium:

Pursuit of Civil

Rights and Public

Sector Values in

the 21st Century:

Examining

Dr. Martin Luther

King Jr.’s Vision in

the Trump Era