E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
My research concerns public health
issues related to minority health, in particular, the relationship of stigma,
prejudice, and discrimination on the health of sexual minorities.In 2011 I was called to testify at a hearing
of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) on peer-to-peer violence
and bullying in schools.Research in
this area has been quite solid and shown consistent and robust findings:lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and
questioning (LGBTQ) youth fare worse than heterosexual youth.Compared with their heterosexual peers,
LGBTQ youth experience more stress, including violence bullying and, related to
this, worse health outcomes and academic performance.Most public health professionals agree that
LGBTQ youth can be helped if schools stem violence and bullying and, generally,
improve the school environment—making it more friendly and accommodating for
LGBTQ youth.
At the USCCR hearing I was taken by
surprise when invitees of the Republican members of the Commission opposed such
recommended interventions on behalf of LGBTQ youth. In particular, I was intrigued by concerns
that efforts to improve the school environment for LGBTQ students, aimed at
reducing stigma and prejudice, raised First Amendment concerns. I was particularly struck by Professor Eugene
Volokh’s testimony,
which singled out one of my statement to the committee, saying “[O]ne of the
things that [Meyer noted] is that one of the dangers to the mental health of
gay students is anti-gay stigma and prejudice. I think that's probably right,
but the consequence of that is that if you take that logic seriously, then
again speech, whether on campus or off campus, that expresses and contributes
to the stigma of prejudice would be punishable.”
As a public health researcher I
have never seen such concerns voiced.
We, in public health, generally view efforts to reduce stigma,
prejudice, and discrimination as desirable and even laudable; we don’t really
discuss stigma as a conventional point of view and as protected speech. But upon considering these issues, I came to
realize that Volokh and others raise significant concerns. After all, gay-affirmative interventions
aimed at reducing stigma, by their nature, attempt to unsettle social
arrangements and alter values and attitudes. These values and attitudes are central to current
public debate.
I studied the issues with the help
of Stuart Biegel, a law professor at UCLA who also gave a statement to
the Commission on this topic, and Ronald Bayer, a public health professor at
Columbia University who studies public health ethics. In this process I came to believe that public
health researchers and educators ought to attend to these First Amendment
concerns. Although some colleagues do
not agree with me—they believe that reducing antigay stigma is an indubitable goal—I
believe that First Amendment challenges raise interesting questions that do not
always have easy answers.
I still believe that public health
interventions to reduce stigma are laudable and that they are required to
ensure the safety and well-being of LGBTQ kids.
I also came to realize that case law and future litigation will not
provide enough guidelines to school administrators on how to promote a
gay-affirmative environment while protecting First Amendment rights. But I also came to realize that while there
are challenges, there is no inherent
conflict between providing a gay-affirmative environment that combats stigma
and assuring First Amendment rights.
What we need are interventions that address stigma and prejudice and
allow, and even encourage, free discussion and protected speech while assuring
the dignity and safety of LGBTQ students.
Ilan H. Meyer is Williams Senior Scholar for Public Policy The Williams Institute UCLA School of Law. You can reach him by e-mail at meyer at law.ucla.edu