Cristina Nichole Iglesias has been denied critical medical care, raped, physically and sexually abused, and even held hostage during her time housed in federal corrections facilities for men. Ms. Iglesias’ victimization is a direct result of the federal Bureau of Prisons’ (BOP) refusal to recognize Ms. Iglesias as the woman she is and to provide her the health care and the security that she desperately needs. A copy of the complaint filed today can be found here.

Though assigned male at birth, Ms. Iglesias has known that she is female from a very young age. The BOP has recognized that Ms. Iglesias is a transgender woman and diagnosed her with gender dysphoria as far back as 1994 but has refused to provide her the basic medical care she needs and refused to move her to a women’s facility choosing instead to incarcerate her with men even in the face of escalating attacks and threats on her life.  

While the federal government has long been aware of the particular vulnerabilities that women who are transgender face in custody, the Trump administration rescinded policy guidance intended to protect transgender prisoners and put in place a rule that makes placement decisions based on a person’s assigned sex at birth. This approach reversed the progress that had been made in finally recognizing the authentic existence of women who are transgender and the risks they face when housing them in men’s facilities.

Correctional experts understand the high likelihood of sexual assault that transgender women face when held in facilities for men, which is why the regulations implementing the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) require prisons – including federal prisons – to make individualized placement decisions that take into account where each transgender person feels they would be safest. This individualized approach has been undermined by the Trump Administration’s change in BOP policy – a change that is only one part of a series of steps designed to roll back protections for LGBTQ people in the United States.  

In a filing this week in federal court for the Southern District of Illinois, Ms. Iglesias ask the court to order the BOP to provide her with essential treatment for gender dysphoria, consistent with well-recognized medical standards, and transfer her to a women’s prison as required by her treatment and to protect her safety.  

“Cristina has endured a nightmare during her time in the BOP,” said John Knight, Director of the LGBTQ & HIV Project for the ACLU of Illinois and one of the lawyers representing Ms. Iglesias. “She was denied basic hormone treatment for many years and is still being denied gender affirming surgery and related treatments. She has been denied transfer to a women’s prison even though keeping her housed with men has resulted in her being subjected to repeated incidents of sexual and physical abuse.” 

“Cristina has experienced severe emotional distress, including thoughts of suicide, as a result of being denied appropriate health care and secure housing. Her circumstances demand change.” 

The level of cruelty and abuse that Cristina has been subjected to are causing her significant harm and remain a threat to her survival. Every day Cristina is subjected to devastating comments from staff and other prisoners who call her a “bearded woman” and also continue to refer to her by male pronouns. Cristina has also been subjected to assaults because she is a transgender woman. Earlier this year, Ms. Iglesias was held hostage by her cell mate who objected to being housed with a transgender woman and would not release her until prison staff used force to make him do so. 

The complaint filed asks that Ms. Iglesias be evaluated by medical personnel qualified in the standards of care for someone with gender dysphoria, provided access to permanent hair removal and gender affirmation surgery and transferred to a women’s prison consistent with her identity.  

“Experts widely recognize that denying someone the health care they need for gender dysphoria causes transgender people serious and lasting harm. Likewise, housing a woman in a male corrections facility is an invitation to violence and harassment,” added Knight.  

“We urge the court to act swiftly to end this nightmare for Cristina.”      

In addition to Mr. Knight, Ms. Iglesias is represented by Taylor Brown of the National ACLU LGBT & HIV Project, and the Chicago office of Winston & Strawn.  

Everyone’s work experience has changed this year because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, but there is one thing that stubbornly refuses to change: discrimination against workers who are pregnant or have recently given birth.

When our client Sarah Spriesch was pregnant, she was involuntarily forced onto a medical leave even though she was willing and able to continue doing her job as a paramedic with the Chicago Fire Department. When she returned to work after giving birth, she was denied breaks and a clean place to pump, causing her pain and humiliation including on one occasion when she leaked through her shirt in front of her colleagues.

Another client – Jennifer Panattoni, an officer in the Frankfort Police Department – was denied a properly fitting uniform and protective gear during her pregnancy. She was eventually forced off the job she loved and required to take leave, limiting the financial resources available to her growing family, when the Department refused to modify her duties for her safety and the safety of her progressing pregnancy. Worse yet, her Department then subjected her to the same mistreatment all over again during her second pregnancy.

Pregnant workers who can safely continue to work should be allowed to do so. One reason our efforts for both Ms. Spriesch and Ms. Panattoni were successful is a state law passed in Illinois in 2014 which guarantees that workers who are pregnant or have recently given birth must be provided reasonable accommodations that enable them to continue doing their jobs. This is a critical protection that ensures pregnant workers in Illinois are not forced to make an untenable choice between safeguarding the health of their pregnancy and maintaining their income for their families.

Sadly, not every state has clear protections like these on the books for pregnant and postpartum workers. And the existing federal law which addresses pregnancy discrimination, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, has left many important questions unanswered and created uncertainty about when exactly reasonable accommodations for pregnancy are required.

That is why the ACLU and other advocates support the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), a federal bill being debated in Congress that would promote women’s health and economic security across the country by creating explicit obligations for employers to make reasonable accommodations for pregnant and postpartum workers.

The PWFA is expected to be voted on by the U.S. House of Representatives next week. Click here to let your Representative know that you support these legal protections to ensure no pregnant worker has to choose between her health and her livelihood.

Take Action
 

Illinois General Assembly Joint Hearing With Senate Criminal Law Committee and Senate Special Committee On Public Safety
Subject Matter On: Police Training & Use of Force
September 1, 2020

My name is Karen Sheley and I’m the director of the Police Practices Project at the ACLU of Illinois. Chairman Sims, Chairman Slaughter, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I represent clients who have been harmed by police violence and I thank you, on their behalf and on behalf of the ACLU of Illinois, for focusing on this urgent issue.

Americans today may appear divided on many issues, but Americans of all racial and ethnic backgrounds are united in calling for significant and systemic changes to policing. In a recent poll, nearly 80% of people think that police violence is a serious issue.

People from all walks of life have taken to the streets to demand change, only to be confronted by police wearing riot gear, driving armored trucks, and brandishing military rifles. In these situations and others, police officers exhibit a “warrior mentality,” handling common interactions with the public with overwhelming unnecessary force and the tactics and tools of an occupying army.

This is the moment to implement real – and overdue – changes to policing. The need for this change is reflected in countless stories and names. In Illinois, we are called to act by the deaths of Laquan McDonald and Jemel Roberson, and the lasting harm to Jaylan Butler and too many others to name. And in our neighboring states, names like George Floyd, Jacob Blake, and Breonna Taylor are etched into our collective memory, part of a tragic narrative that draws us to righteous anger.

I represent Jaylan Butler, the only Black member of the Eastern Illinois University men’s swim team. In early 2019, Jaylan was on a team bus in the Quad Cities area when the team stopped for a break.

Jaylan got off the bus to stretch his legs, when he was surrounded by officers with guns drawn. Calling on lessons from his father, Jaylan threw his cell phone down and dropped to his knees. Officers shoved him into the snow, and one pinned him to the ground by pressing a knee into his back. Another officer put a gun to his head and threatened to kill him with language I won’t use here. Only the school’s bus driver, a veteran, intervened – not another officer, even though Jaylan had done nothing wrong.

After the killing of George Floyd, Jaylan acknowledged he was fortunate to survive, but that the trauma has stayed with him, reignited by all of the many reports and videos of police killing Black people.

We need stricter and clearer restrictions on when and how officers use force because current federal and state law standards are not sufficient to prevent police violence and protect Black lives. Five years ago the General Assembly engaged in police reform. We are here again, but the moment now is even more critical.

We have an opportunity – and an obligation – to be bolder in our vision than we were then. That starts by accepting the difficult truth that – despite previous efforts by many people acting in good faith – the reforms enacted five years ago are not enough. We must make the commitment to change policing in Illinois. Otherwise, we will face more police violence, more protest, and a future where skin color continues to dictate whether you are killed or seriously injured by a police officer.

We need major changes to protect Black lives. We know that race is a key driver in police interactions. We see it in our communities and on the news, but also in the data collection about pedestrian and traffic stops that this body had the leadership to make permanent. Without meaningful restrictions on police use of force, every interaction with police – even for traffic stops and minor violations – creates the potential for a deadly interaction.

We must join the growing number of states across the country that are taking concrete steps to limit police use of force. As the General Assembly grapples with this issue, we propose some common-sense limits on use of force, and greater accountability for police who use it. Any police reform legislation must directly address police use of force in four ways:

FIRST: Illinois needs explicit limitations on use of force.
For example, force should be used only if absolutely necessary to protect against an imminent threat of bodily harm, all reasonable alternatives have been exhausted, and force can be used in a manner that minimizes injury to the person and bystanders. Deadly force should be prohibited unless absolutely necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm.

SECOND: Illinois should ban the tactics and tools that often result in unjustified force, including deadly force.
We must completely ban chokeholds and other methods used to asphyxiate individuals – like the extreme chest and back compression that killed George Floyd. And tear gas, sonic cannons, and rubber bullets must be prohibited. These have been used in response to people engaged in protest. That is wrong. We must also ban police departments from accepting military equipment, and decommission military equipment from police department arsenals.

THIRD: We must require consistent accountability from officers.
Officers must hold each other accountable by “safely interven[ing] by verbal and physical means” when they “observe another peace officer use any unauthorized force.” Officers must also immediately report to their supervisor if they see another officer engage in unlawful force. Police must be protected from retaliation in making such reports, and police who are found to use excessive or unauthorized force must be disciplined.

FOURTH: Illinois needs a robust, statewide system for recording and reporting information about police uses of force, including with respect to SWAT/tactical team deployments.
This system will allow us to assess the success of our efforts over time. It will also allow law enforcement agencies to better assess the actions of officers who repeatedly abuse force.

In conclusion, we cannot quell the anger and frustration of communities toward police without addressing their cause, and we cannot restore community trust in policing unless we earn it. The measures we are proposing today are reasonable, common-sense reforms that will not only benefit the public and save countless Black lives, but also help police across the state do their job more safely and effectively.

Restricting force provides police with needed clarity in their interactions with the public. Requiring police to stop unauthorized uses of force and to report these incidents will change the expectations of policing and departments. And requiring use of force data collection and record
keeping will help keep all of us accountable to the public.

We look forward to working with you, the communities demanding reform, and the law enforcement leaders sworn to protect all of us to make the changes we need.