Tax law can be a complex and confusing topic, especially when it comes to LGBT-specific laws. At Pride Legal, our tax law attorneys in Los Angeles are here to help you navigate the complexities of the law and ensure that you are in compliance with all applicable regulations. In this article, we will provide an overview of LGBT-specific tax laws in Los Angeles County, California. Before European settlement and colonization in the 18th century, numerous Native American groups lived in the region. Among these, many recognize a third gender role in their societies (nowadays also called two-spirit).
People with a male body who behave and act like women and perform typically feminine tasks are known as yaawa among the Atsugewi, kwit or cuit among the Luiseño, Tüdayapi among the Paiute of the North, clele among the Wailaki, 'aqi among the Chumash, wergern among the Yurok and í-wa-musp among the Yuki. Female-to-male individuals are known as Brumaiwi among the Astugewi and Musp-íwap Náip among the Yuki. Similarly, among the Nomlaki and Klamath and Modoc peoples, respectively, Walusa and T'winiş individuals form a third gender together with men and women. In the language of the Kings River Yokuts, it is tonoo'tcim, while it is tonocim in the Palewyami language.
There were no known legal or social punishments for engaging in homosexual activities in these societies. In 1909, California passed a law that provided for the possible sterilization of moral or sexual perverts. By 1948, 19,042 people had been sterilized under the law. In 1950, the state attorney general issued the opinion that sterilizing inmates for reasons other than therapeutic reasons was likely to be unconstitutional. At the time, California had the most cases of sterilization of all states, with more cases than all states combined.
In 1951, the law was amended to eliminate perversion as a reason for sterilization. Starting in the mid-20th century, the debate surrounding the sodomy law became increasingly widespread. In 1975, a bill was introduced to repeal the state law on sodomy. In 1972 and 1974, California voters chose to amend the Bill of Rights of the State Constitution to include inalienable rights such as life and liberty, the acquisition, possession and protection of property, and the pursuit and attainment of security, happiness and privacy. In May 1975, an adult law for residents over 18 years of age was passed, restricting existing laws on sodomy or oral copulation for same-sex or opposite-sex couples to only genuinely criminal cases, and took effect the following year. In 1985, the city of Berkeley became the first state government entity to legally recognize same-sex couples by enacting its domestic partnership policy for city and school district employees.
The term domestic partnership was coined by city employee and gay rights activist Tom Brougham, and all other domestic partnership policies enacted in the state in subsequent years are modeled after Berkeley politics. During its passage, some concern was expressed that, by repealing the prohibition of same-sex marriage, SB 1306 violated the separation of powers, as the State Assembly would repeal an initiative approved by voters. However, the consensus of the Assembly Judiciary Committee was that voters cannot pass an unconstitutional and subsequently banned law, any more than the Assembly can. In light of In Re Marriage Cases and Hollingsworth v. Perry, who collectively prohibited the application of any law that prohibited same-sex marriage, the Assembly Judiciary Committee determined that the Assembly has the capacity to repeal prohibited laws. Marriage is a personal relationship that arises from a civil contract between two people, for which the consent of both parties capable of entering into that contract is necessary. California law clarifies protections against hate crimes based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression, among other categories.
State law provides for improvements in penalties for a crime motivated by a victim's perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity. Support for LGBT rights and same-sex marriage has evolved significantly over recent decades. Over time several LGBT-specific voting initiatives have taken place in California.
LGBT Voting InitiativesThe first was Proposition 6 - The Briggs Initiative - which would have banned gays and lesbians from working in public schools.
The initiative failed despite polls initially showing broad support. In 2000s two same-sex marriage initiatives were voted on - Proposition 22 and Proposition 8 - both successful.
LGBT LegislationThe GLOBE Act would protect and promote LGBTQI people's rights around world by using existing sanctions to punish countries that abuse LGBTQI people; ensure foreign assistance & global health programs include LGBTQI people; decriminalize LGBTQI status in rule of law programs; guarantee fair access to asylum & shelter programs for LGBTQI people who suffer persecution; order State Department to issue non-binary markers (X) in US passports; clarify children born abroad through surrogacy or assisted reproductive technology to legally married Americans can obtain US citizenship. The Lifting Immigrant Families Through (LIFT) Benefits Access Restoration (BAR) Act would eliminate 5 year deadline for accessing critical social & health services - Medicaid CHIP & SNAP - for legally present immigrants (people with “green” cards DACA recipients victims of crime COFA migrants victims of child abuse & orphans with special immigrant youth status & other non citizens legally residing US).
This bill would allow some 600000 “dreamers” to obtain legal permanent residence & US citizenship; extend protections & path to citizenship for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) beneficiaries & Deferred Forced Departure (DED) beneficiaries. The Every Child Deserves a Family Act would prohibit federally funded child welfare service providers from discriminating on basis sexual orientation gender identity marital status & religion; prohibit conversion therapy for adoptive youth; require collection data on LGBTQ adoptive youth & their parents; require federally funded care services & staff training reaffirm children's complex social identities including religion sex sexual orientation & gender identity.< P > P >.