REPORT: 4.5% of U.S. Adult Population is LGBT, 11+ Million People

The Williams Institute at UCLA Law School, an LGBT public policy think tank, has released their latest estimate of the percentage of the size of the LGBT population in the United States. The number is 11.3 million, or 4.5% of U.S. adults identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

Hat/tip Williams Institute

REPORT: 4.1% of U.S. American Adults Are LGBT, Totals 10M

The Williams Institute at UCLA has released another report on the demographics of adult LGBT population in the United States. They also have an interactive website where you can explore this data for yourself.

One key result is that there are well over 10 million LGBT adults in the United States, which is roughly 4.1% of the adult population. However, there is wide variation in the states in which the LGBT population resides. The District of Columbia has the highest percentage of its population self-reporting as LGBT:

Check it out for yourself!

REPORT: LGBT Are 2-6% Of U.S. Population (Varies By Survey)

The Williams Institute at UCLA Law School has issued a major new report analyzing the demographics of the LGBT populations in the United States. This excerpt from the executive summary highlights the important findings of the report:

Despite variations across the surveys related to the time period in which data were collected, data collection modes, and the wordings of LGB/T identity questions, findings suggest many consistencies across data sources in demographic characteristics of LGB/T identified adults in comparison to their non-LGB/T counterparts. These consistencies persist even among surveys where estimates of the prevalence of LGB/T identified adults vary. 

The proportion of adults who identified as LGB/T varied across the surveys from 2.2% in the NHIS to 4.0% in the Gallup data. These estimates imply that between 5.2 and 9.5 million adults in the United States identify as LGB/T. 

[...] 

Examples of consistent findings include:• LGB/T identity is more common among younger populations.• LGB/T populations generally share the racial and ethnic characteristics of non-LGB/T individuals.• Adults are more likely to identify as LGB/T in the Northeast and West than in the South and Midwest.

The report goes on to compare educational attainment, geographical distribution, racial/ethnic make-up and other characteristics of the LGB/T community.

REPORT: Lifting Ban On MSM Blood Donation Would Increase Supply By 2-4%

The Williams Institute at UCLA Law School has released a report that analyzes the impact of changing the current lifetime ban on blood donation by any man who has had sex with another man (MSM) since 1977.

In "UPDATE: Effects of Lifting Blood Donation Bans on Men who Have Sex with Men" authors Ayako Miyashita and Dr. Gary Gates estimate the number of men who would donate blood if the "gay blood ban" was relaxed at over 300,000 leading to an increase in the blood supply of 2-4%  (600,000 pints) per year which could potentially save the lives of 1.8 million people.

The way the estimate is done is that Miyashita and Gates look at three different scenarios in which the current lifetime ban is changed in three ways: removed entirely, changed to a "deferral" lasting 12-months after sexual contact with another man and changed to a 5-year deferral.

In the US, 8.5% of men (10 million) say that they have had at least one male sexual partner since age 18. GSS data show that 4.1% of men (4.8 million) have had a male sex partner in the last five years, and 3.8% of men (4.5 million men) reported having a male sex partner in the last twelve months.

[...] 

If the current MSM ban were completely lifted, we estimate that an additional 360,600 men would likely donate 615,300 additional pints of blood each year. If MSM who have not had sexual contact with another man in the past twelve months were permitted to donate, we estimate that 185,800 additional men are likely to donate 317,000 additional pints of blood each year. If MSM who have not had sexual contact with another man in the past five years were permitted to donate, we estimate that 172,000 additional men would make an additional 293,400 blood donations.

To me it appears as if the report buries the lead! 8.5% of American men say they have had sex with another man since age 18 (i.e. as an adult). Does that mean that this percentage of the population is "gay"? Not really, since being gay is a complicated combination of identity, self-realization and  resistance to social stigma. However, in my mind the significance of this figure is the demonstration that same-sex sexual attraction among men is more common than is usually reported to the general public.

REPORT: Aussie Marriage Equality Worth $161M

The Williams Institute at UCLA Law School released a report analyzing the fiscal impact of Australia legalizing marriage equality and came up with a big number: at least $161,000,000 over 3 years.

This is a conservative estimate, as the executive summary states:

Extending marriage to Australian same-sex couples would boost the country’s economy by $161 million over three years. This estimate is based on a projection that 54 percent (or 17,820) of Australia’s approximately 33,000 same-sex couples would marry. Tasmania, in particular, stands to claim a large share of that $161 million should it become the first state to allow same-sex couples to marry. In addition to marriages by Tasmanian couples, an estimated 15,236 couples would travel from out-of-state to marry in Tasmania, resulting in an economic gain of $96 million or more for the state. The figures in the report draw upon recent surveys, estimating the total number of Australian same-sex couples and the number of same-sex couples interested in marriage. Notably, the estimates in the report are conservative compared to other estimates because they only include spending by resident couples.  They do not include spending by wedding guests, or wedding or tourism spending by couples traveling to Australia to marry. One recent study that took this additional spending into account estimated an economic boost of $742 million.

Come on, Australia! Don't you want 2011 US Open champion Sam Stosur to be able to legally marry her girlfriend?

The Global Arc of Justice: Sexual Orientation Around The World

My friend and executive director Brad Sears of the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy at UCLA Law School emailed me today to remind people that the early registration deadline for The Global Arc of Justice: Sexual Orientation Law Around The World, the conference they are putting on this year, is coming up on February 1. The list of speakers is long and distinguished. It includes at least two of MadProfessah's fellow bloggers, Andres Duque and Nan Hunter.

Justice Eugenio Raul Zaffaroni, Argentina Supreme Court

Justice Michael Donald Kirby, High Court of Australia

Presiding Justice Carol W. Hunstein, Supreme Court of Georgia

Justice Virgina L. Linder, Supreme Court of Oregon

Dr. Jorge Saavedra Lopez, General Director, Mexican Ministry of Health’s National Center for Prevention and Control of HIV/AIDS

Judge Karen Atala, Chilean judge denied custody of her children by Chile's Supreme Court—case currently with the Organization of American States' Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

Germán Rincón Perfetti, human rights lawyer in Colombia

Peter Ashman, Executive Director, INTERIGHTS

Boris Dittrich, Former Member of the Parliament, the Netherlands, Advocacy Director, LBGT Rights Program, Human Rights Watch

Tatiana Cordero, human rights lawyer in Ecuador, Executive Director of Corporation Promotion de la Mujer/Taller de Comunicacion de la Mujer

Sonia Corréa, coordinator of the Gender Initiative at the Brazilian Institute for Social and Economic Analysis

Aeyal M. Gross, Professor of Law, Tel-Aviv University Faculty of Law & Vice President, ILGLaw

Tamara Adrián Hernandez, Professor of Law, University of Caracas

Marcelo Ernesto Ferreyra, Coordinator del Programa para America Latina y el Caribe de la Comision Internacional de los Derechos Humanos para Gays y Lesbianas, IGLHRC

Mauro Cabral, Professor, National University of Cordoba

Marcela Romero, Regional Coordinator, Latin American and Carribean Network of Transgender People

Hari Phyual, human rights lawyer in Nepal, International Commission of Jurists

Richard Green, Professor, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine

Ali Miller, Lecturer in Residence, Senior Fellow, Thelton E. Hender Center for Social Justice, Boalt Hall

Lee Badgett, Professor of Economics, U. Mass.-Amherst, Research Director, The Williams Institute

Andrés Duque, creator of blabbeando.blogspot.com, Latino Commission on AIDS

Douglas Elliott, Partner, Roy Elliott O'Connor LLP

Gary J. Gates, Senior Research Fellow, The Williams Institute

Nan Hunter, Professor of Law, Georgetown Law, Legal Director, The Williams Institute and blogger at Hunter of Justice

Karon Monaghan, human rights lawyer in the United Kingdom

Andrew Park, Senior Philanthropic Advisor, Wellspring Advisors

Clifford J. Rosky, Associate Professor, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law

Omar Banos, AIDS Project Los Angeles

David B. Cruz, Professor of Law, USC School of Law & President, ILGLaw

Paula Ettelbrick, Executive Director, International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission

Stefano Fabeni, Director, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex Initiative of Global Rights

Helmut Graupner, human rights lawyer in Austria

John Heilman, West Hollywood City Councilmember

John Duran, West Hollywood City Councilmember

Holning Lau, Associate Professor of Law, Hofstra Law

Darren Rosenblum, Associate Professor of Law, Pace Law School

Lara Stemple, Director of Graduate Studies, UCLA School of Law

Monica Taher, Azteca America

Brad Sears, Executive Director, The Williams Institute

Douglas Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada, LL.M. Professor, Chulalongkorn University

Saúl Sarabia, Lecturer and Director of Critical Race Studies Program, UCLA School of Law

Kees Waaldijk, Faculty of Law, Leiden University

Robert Wintemute, Professor of Human Rights Law, Kings College

Evan Wolfson, Executive Director, Freedom to Marry

Russell Robinson, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law

Cheryl Harris, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law

Maximo Lager, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law

Hiroyuki Taniguchi, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science

MadProfessah intends to attend the conference March 11-14 and do some blogging coverage of the more interesting plenary sessions. The full schedule can be accessed here.

REPORT: Williams Institute's National Update on Sexual Orientation

The Los Angeles Times reports about the Williams Institute's 6th Annual Update on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy in today's edition with an article coyly entitled "UCLA to establish unique law chair." The story is about a 1-million-dollar gift to the UCLA School of Law to establish the McDonald/Wright Professorship in Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy by a well-known gay philanthropic couple. John McDonald and Rob Wright had previously given $100,000 to the Williams Institute to support its judicial education and training program and years ago in 1996 had given $1.5 million to the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center to refurbish its headquarters building, which was renamed the McDonald/Wright building.

MadProfessah attended the cocktail reception in the Darling Library of the UCLA Law School at which the announcement of the establishment of the nation's first endowed academic chair in sexual orientation law and public policy was made. Also in attendance were many of the nation's leading scholars in the field: Yale Law's William B. Eskridge, UCLA Law Professors Brad Sears, William B. Rubenstein and Russell Robinson, USC's David Cruz, Williams Institute benefactor Charles R. Williams, Lambda Legal's Jenny Pizer, Alphonso David and Jon Davidson as well as Freedom To Marry's Evan Wolfson.

Also announced at the reception were the winners of the 3rd Annual National Sexual Orientation Law Moot Court Competion, the final round of which was judged by two sitting Justices of the Washington State Supreme Court (Barbara Madsen and Susan Owens) and members of the "infamous" Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals (Raymond Fisher). MadProfessah had been a volunteer judge in the first two rounds and took the picture above of the final round on Friday February 23rd.

UCLA Law School's Williams Institute Hosts Moot Court Finals Today

As careful readers may recall from a few weeks ago, MadProfessah was a guest judge at the 3rd Annual National Sexual Orientation Moot Court Competition run by the Williams Institute at UCLA Law School. The finals will be held today, Friday February 23rd at 4:30pm in Room 1327 of Dodd Hall. The two teams competing will be from New York University School of Law and University of Connecticut Law School. The case involves a constitutional challenge to the hypothetical state of New Texico's adoption statute which provides a fatal disadvantage to same-sex couples who have lived together for at least six months.

The finals will be held as part of the Williams Institute's 6th Annual Sexual Orientation Law Update also happening today at UCLA Law School.

3rd Annual National Sexual Orientation Law Moot Court Compettion

So, Mad Professah spent nearly 5 hours at UCLA Law School Saturday morning judging the first two rounds of the 3rdANSOLMCC (quite a mouthful as an acronym). The experience was a whole bunch of fun!

All the student competitors were well-prepared, smart and eager. Some spoke too fast, some not fast enough. Others were very responsive to the judges' questions, some not responsive enough. My fellow judges were practicing attorneys, retired attorneys, recent law school graduates and academics like myself.

Although my personal sympathy was with the Petitioners (the side asking that the statute effectively banning adoption in the state of New Texico by same-sex couples who have cohabited for at least 6 months), the Respondents had current law and precedent on their side and it was fascinating to listen and appreciate the skill and creativity of all the advocates as they tried to argue the same sets of facts in their favor.

The finals of the Moot Court competition will be on Friday February 23 at the William Institute's 6th Annual Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy Update, judged by The Honorable Justices Barbara Madsen and Susan Owens of the Washington State Supreme Court and The Honorable Judge Raymond Fisher of the Ninth Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals.

The State of New Texico Rests...

Mad Professah is judging in the Third Annual National Sexual Orientation Moot Court Competition at UCLA Law School tomorrow organized by the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and Public Policy.

The problem involves a statute passed by the state of New Texico (sic) which has the effect of preventing single-sex, cohabiting couples from adopting children in that state. To wit, the questions that will be argued are:

The questions are limited to:

1. Does Amendment 1A to Section 23 of the New Texico Family Code violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution by drawing a distinction between persons in a “domestic homosexual relationship” and all other persons?

2. Does Amendment 1A to Section 23 of the New Texico Family Code impermissibly infringe on Petitioners’ constitutionally protected liberty interests under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution?

Although, this is simply a moot court competition question, the controversy over restrictions on same-sex adoption is ongoing. In particular, the recent 11th Circuit Decision in Lofton upholding Florida's ban on gay or lesbian people adopting children comes to mind.