Allows an aggrieved individual to assert a violation of this Act in a judicial proceeding and recover reasonable attorney`s fees should they prevail.Opponent`s argument against bill:(by Cato Institute reported on Fox News): A bill in Congress that would prohibit discrimination in public schools based on sexual orientation or gender identity could
stifle free speech and even lead to `homosexual indoctrination` in the nation`s classrooms, critics say.
`The real danger is how this will be interpreted,` said the associate director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the Cato Institute. `The definition of harassment could be broadly interpreted that anybody who expressed a totally legitimate opinion about homosexual behavior could be made illegal. That`s a violation of those kids who want to express opposition to LGBT opinions or behavior. People have a legitimate reason to be concerned about this--not because they`re `haters` but because you`re now trying to balance different rights.`
Proponent`s argument for bill: (Rep. Jared POLIS, House sponsor): `Hatred has no place in the classroom. Every student has the right to an education free from harassment and violence. This bill will protect the freedoms of our students and enshrine the values of equality and opportunity in the classroom.`
Source: H.R.1652 / S.1088 13-H1652 on Jul 8, 2013
Enforce against wage discrimination based on gender.
Swalwell co-sponsored Paycheck Fairness Act
Congress finds the following: - Women have entered the workforce in record numbers over the past 50 years.
- Despite the enactment of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, many women continue to earn significantly lower pay than men for equal work. These pay disparities exist in both the private and governmental sectors. In many instances, the pay disparities can only be due to continued intentional discrimination or the lingering effects of past discrimination.
- The existence of such pay disparities depresses the wages of working families who rely on the wages of all members of the family to make ends meet; and undermines women`s retirement security.
- Artificial barriers to the elimination of discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex continue to exist decades after the enactment of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. These barriers have resulted because the Equal Pay Act has not worked as Congress originally intended.
-
The Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have important and unique responsibilities to help ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work.
- The Department of Labor is responsible for investigating and prosecuting equal pay violations, especially systemic violations, and in enforcing all of its mandates.
- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the primary enforcement agency for claims made under the Equal Pay Act.
- With a stronger commitment [to enforcement], increased information on wage data and more effective remedies, women will be better able to recognize and enforce their rights.
- Certain employers have already made great strides in eradicating unfair pay disparities in the workplace and their achievements should be recognized.
Source: S.84&H.R.377 13-HR0377 on Jan 23, 2013
Recognize 1961 Freedom Riders against segregated buses.
Swalwell co-sponsored Congressional Gold Medal for the Freedom Riders
Congressional summary:: A BILL to award a Congressional Gold Medal to the Freedom Riders, collectively, in recognition of their unique contribution to Civil Rights, which inspired a revolutionary movement for equality in interstate travel. The Congress finds the following:
- In 1960, the Supreme Court ruled in Boynton v. Virginia that segregated bus and rail stations were unconstitutional.
- The rigid system of racial segregation that prevailed in the United States during the 1960s did not permit a Black person to sit next to a White person on any bus traveling through interstate commerce and in most locations in the South. Bus stations had `Whites Only` waiting areas and Blacks were not permitted to wait in those areas despite the Supreme Court making it the law of the land.
- The Freedom Riders, with the intent to end segregation in public transportation throughout the South, paved the way for full racial integration of the US transit system.
They overcame prejudice, discrimination, and violence. They sparked a movement that changed our Nation.
- The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) selected 13 volunteers for nonviolent response training. The Freedom Riders used their strategies of nonviolence to challenge the South`s Jim Crow laws directly by riding from Washington DC to New Orleans.
- On the morning of May 4, 1961, the 13 Freedom Riders, comprised of 7 Blacks and 6 Whites, boarded two buses, with Blacks and Whites seated together.
- Initially, the Freedom Riders had encountered only minor clashes until a stop in South Carolina. In Rock Hill, an angry mob severely beat John Lewis, now a Congressman from Georgia, when he entered the bus station. Additional mobs fought the group in Alabama and Mississippi.
Congress shall present a gold medal of appropriate design to the Freedom Riders, collectively. The gold medal shall be given to the Smithsonian Institution, where it will be available for display & research.
Source: H.R.4041 14-H4041 on Feb 11, 2014
Don't elevate gender identity as a protected class.
Swalwell voted YEA H.Amdt. 1128 to H.R. 5055
Heritage Action Summary: The Maloney Amendment would ratify President Obama`s 2014 executive order barring federal contractors from what it describes as `discrimination` on the basis of `sexual orientation and gender identity` in their private employment policies. In practice, it would have required federal contractors to grant biologically male employees who identify as women unfettered access to women`s lockers, showers, and bathrooms.
Heritage Foundation recommendation to vote NO: (5/25/2016): Congress should not be elevating sexual orientation and gender identity as a protected class garnering special legal privileges, which is the intent of the Maloney Amendment. The Maloney Amendment constitutes bad policy that unnecessarily regulates businesses. It risks undoing longstanding protections in civil rights law and makes clear that the president`s orders are not exempt from them.
ACLU recommendation to vote YES: (5/11/2016):
We see today claims to a right to discriminate--by refusing to provide services to LGBT people--based on religious objections. Claiming a right to discriminate in the name of religion is not new. In the 1960s, we saw objections to laws requiring integration in restaurants because of sincerely held beliefs that God wanted the races to be separate. We saw religiously affiliated universities refuse to admit students who engaged in interracial dating. In those cases, we recognized that requiring integration was not about violating religious liberty; it was about ensuring fairness. It`s no different today.
Religious freedom in America means that we all have a right to our religious beliefs, but this does not give us the right to use our religion to impose those beliefs on others.
Legislative outcome: Amendment passed by the House 223-195-15 4/26/16; overall bill H.R.5055 failed 112-305-16 on 5/26/2016
Source: Congressional vote 16-H5055 on May 25, 2016
Let states recognize same sex marriage.
Swalwell signed Respect for Marriage Act
Congressional Summary: Amends the Defense of Marriage Act to let states recognize same sex marriage. Defines `marriage` to provide that an individual shall be considered married if that individual`s marriage is valid in the state or country where the marriage was entered into. Removes the definition of `spouse` (currently, a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife).
Wikipedia and GLAAD history: In United States v. Windsor (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court declared Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) struck down the act`s provisions disallowing same-sex marriages to be performed under federal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court case did not challenge Section 2 of DOMA. Section 2 declares that all states have the right to deny recognition of the marriage of same sex couples that originated in states where they are legally recognized.
Heritage Foundation
recommendation to vote NO: (3/20/2013): Americans respect marriage, not only as a crucial institution of civil society but the fundamental building block of all human civilization. This is why 41 states and the federal government affirm that marriage is between a man and a woman. The government isn`t in the business of affirming our loves. Rather it leaves consenting adults free to live and love as they choose. And contrary to what some say, there is no ban on same-sex marriage. In all 50 states, two people of the same sex may choose to live together, and choose to join a religious community that blesses their relationship. What`s at issue is whether the government will recognize such relationships as marriages--and compel others to recognize and affirm same-sex relationships as marriages.
Legislative outcome: Died in Committee (never came to a vote).
Source: S.29 & H.197 17-H0197 on Jan 6, 2015
Sponsored bill for ratifying Equal Rights Amendment.
Swalwell co-sponsored Removing deadline for ERA ratification
H.J.Res.17: Removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment: This joint resolution eliminates the deadline for the ratification of the ERA, which prohibits discrimination based on sex. The amendment was proposed to the states in House Joint Resolution 208 of the 92nd Congress, as agreed to in the Senate on March 22, 1972. The amendment shall be part of the Constitution whenever ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
Opinion to vote YES (Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL-7): The ERA was first proposed in 1923, shortly after women gained the right to vote. [The original] 1979 deadline was later extended before it expired. By the end of 1982, 35 of the 38 required state legislatures had voted to ratify the ERA. Nevada ratified the ERA in 2017, Illinois in 2018 and, in January 2020, Virginia became the 38th and final state required to ratify it. If passed in the Senate, H.J. Res. 79 would remove the arbitrary 1982 deadline.
Opinion to vote NO (Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA-1): H. J. Res 17 would retroactively remove the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. Regardless of your thoughts on the ERA, the deadline for the states to ratify the amendment expired four decades ago. By passing this resolution, House Democrats are virtue signaling and trying to take a shortcut around what is required in our constitutional amendment process. Those who want to pass an ERA will need to start this process from the beginning. Today`s vote mocks the intentionally high bar set by our Founders to make changes to our precious Constitution.
Legislative Outcome: Passed House 222-204-4 on 03/17/2021; received in the Senate and read on 3/23. [OnTheIssues notes on the duration for ratification that the 27th Amendment to the United States Constitution was passed by Congress in 1789 and was ratified by 3/4 of the States and became law in 1992, a ratification period of 202 years].
Source: H.J.Res.17 21-HJR17 on Jan 21, 2021
- Click here for definitions & background information
on Civil Rights.
- Click here for a summary of all issue stances
of Eric Swalwell.
- Click here for a Wikipedia profile
of Eric Swalwell.
- Click here for a Ballotpedia profile
of Eric Swalwell.
- Click here for VoteMatch responses
by Eric Swalwell.
- Click here for issue positions of
other CA politicians.
- Click here for
CA primary archives.
- Click here for
CA secondary archives.
|
Other governors on Civil Rights: |
Eric Swalwell on other issues: |
CA Gubernatorial:
Antonio Villaraigosa
Brian Dahle
Caitlyn Jenner
Doug Ose
Eleni Kounalakis
Gavin Newsom
John Chiang
John Cox
Kevin Faulconer
Kevin Paffrath
Laura Smith
Rob Bonta
Tom Steyer
Xavier Becerra
Zoltan Istvan
CA Senatorial:
Adam Schiff
Alex Padilla
Barbara Lee
Gail Lightfoot
James Bradley
Jerome Horton
Katie Porter
Laphonza Butler
Lily Zhou
Mark Meuser
Steve Garvey
|
Mayoral/Gubernatorial races 2025 (seated Jan. 2026):
- NJ Governor:
 Mikie Sherrill (D), U.S. Rep. NJ-11.
vs.Jack Ciattarelli (R), State Assemblyman (2011-2018).
- NYC Mayor:
Zohran Mamdani (D), New York State Assembly, 2021-2025.
vs.Andrew Cuomo (I), former governor of New York, 2011-2021.
vs.Curtis Sliwa (R), CEO of the Guardian Angels.
- VA Governor:
Abigail Spanberger (D), U.S.Rep., VA-7 (2019-2024).
vs.Winsome Earle-Sears (R), Lt. Gov. 2022-2026.
Gubernatorial races 2026:
- AK: Mike Dunleavy(R,term-limited)
vs.Click Bishop(R)
vs.Nancy Dahlstrom(R)
vs.Tom Begich(D)
- AL: Kay Ivey(R,term-limited)
vs.Doug Jones(D)
vs.Tommy Tuberville(R)
vs.Will Boyd(D)
vs.Yolanda Flowers(D)
- AR: Sarah Huckabee Sanders(R,for re-election)
vs.Fredrick Love(D)
- AZ: Katie Hobbs(D,for re-election)
vs.Andy Biggs(R)
vs.David Schweikert(R)
vs.Karrin Taylor Robson(R,withdrew)
- CA: Gavin Newsom(D,term-limited)
vs.Antonio Villaraigosa(D)
vs.Eleni Kounalakis(D,Withdrew to run for state treasurer)
vs.Eric Swalwell(D)
vs.Tom Steyer(D)
vs.Xavier Becerra(D)
vs.Zoltan Istvan(L)
- CO: Jared Polis(D,term-limited)
vs.Greg Lopez(R)
vs.Michael Bennet(D)
vs.Phil Weiser(D)
- CT: Ned Lamont(D,for re-election)
vs.Ryan Fazio(R)
vs.Jen Tooker(R,withdrew)
- FL: Ron DeSantis(R,term-limited)
vs.Byron Donalds(R)
vs.David Jolly(R)
vs.Jason Pizzo(I)
vs.Jerry Demings(D)
- GA: Brian Kemp(R,term-limited)
vs.Brad Raffensperger(R)
vs.Chris Carr(R)
vs.Keisha Lance Bottoms(D)
- HI: Josh Green(D)
(No opponent yet)
- IA: Kim Reynolds(R,retiring)
vs.Brad Sherman (IA)(R)
vs.Randy Feenstra(R)
vs.Rob Sand(D)
- ID: Brad Little(R,for re-election)
vs.Terri Pickens(D)
- IL: J.B. Pritzker(D,for re-election)
vs.Darren Bailey(R)
- KS: Laura Kelly(D,term-limited)
vs.Cindy Holscher(D)
vs.Jeff Colyer(R)
vs.Ty Masterson(R)
vs.Vicki Schmidt(R)
- MA: Maura Healey(D,for re-election)
vs.Mike Kennealy(R)
- MD: Wes Moore(D,for re-election)
vs.Dan Cox(R)
vs.Christopher Bouchat(R)
- ME: Janet Mills(D,term-limited)
vs.Shenna Bellows(D)
vs.Ed Crockett(I)
vs.Robert Charles(R)
|
Gubernatorial races 2026:
- MI: Gretchen Whitmer(D,term-limited)
vs.Aric Nesbitt(R)
vs.Perry Johnson(R)
vs.Jocelyn Benson(D)
vs.John James(R)
vs.Mike Cox(R)
vs.Tom Leonard(R)
vs.Mike Duggan(I)
vs.Garlin Gilchrist(D,withdrew)
- MN: Tim Walz(D,retiring)
vs.Jeff Johnson 2026(R)
vs.Lisa Demuth(R)
vs.Mike Lindell(R)
vs.Scott Jensen(R)
vs.Amy Klobuchar(D)
- NE: Jim Pillen(R,for re-election)
vs.Lynne Walz(D)
- NH: Kelly Ayotte(R,for re-election)
vs.Jon Kiper(D)
- NM: Michelle Lujan-Grisham(D,term-limited)
vs.Deb Haaland(D)
vs.Gregg Hull(R)
vs.Steve Lanier(R)
- NV: Joe Lombardo(R)
vs.Aaron Ford(D)
- NY: Kathy Hochul(D,for re-election)
vs.Bruce Blakeman(R)
vs.Larry Sharpe(L)
vs.Antonio Delgado(D,withdrew)
vs.Elise Stefanik(R,withdrew)
- OH: Mike DeWine(R,term-limited)
vs.Vivek Ramaswamy(R)
vs.Amy Acton(D)
- OK: Kevin Stitt(R,term-limited)
vs.Charles McCall(R)
vs.Cyndi Munson(D)
vs.Jake Merrick(R)
- OR: Tina Kotek(D,for re-election)
vs.Christine Drazan(R)
- PA: Josh Shapiro(D,for re-election)
vs.Ken Krawchuk(L)
vs.Stacy Garrity(R)
- RI: Dan McKee(D,for re-election)
vs.Helena Foulkes(D)
vs.Aaron Guckian(R)
- SC: Henry McMaster(R,term-limited)
vs.Jermaine Johnson(D)
vs.Nancy Mace(R)
vs.Ralph Norman(R)
- SD: Larry Rhoden(R,for re-election)
vs.Dusty Johnson(R)
vs.Jon Hansen(R)
vs.Marty Jackley(R,withdrew)
- TN: Bill Lee(R,term-limited)
vs.Marsha Blackburn(R)
vs.Carnita Atwater(D)
- TX: Greg Abbott(R,for re-election)
vs.Chris Bell(D)
vs.Gina Hinojosa(D)
- VT: Phil Scott(R)
(No opponent yet)
- WI: Tony Evers(D,retiring)
vs.Mandela Barnes(D)
vs.Sara Rodriguez(D)
vs.Kelda Roys(D)
vs.Francesca Hong(D)
vs.Tom Tiffany(R)
- WY: Mark Gordon(R,term-limited)
vs.Eric Barlow(R)
vs.Megan Degenfelder(R)
|
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families/Children
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Infrastructure/Technology
Jobs
Local Issues
Principles/Values
Social Security
Tax Reform
War/Iraq/Mideast
Welfare/Poverty
[Title9]
|
|
| |
Page last updated: Feb 16, 2026; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org
