A Mothers Legacy for Her Son:

Major Court Ruling Recognizes Rights of Rural Gays

ACLU Rural Gay Report

by Eric Ferrero

Madonna Sterling set out to seek justice for her son’s death.

In the process, she achieved a major victory for us all and secured a

significant court ruling for lesbians and gay men in rural communities

nationwide.

A couple of years ago, Sterling’s son, 18-year-old high school senior

Marcus Wayman, was in a parked car with a 17-year-old guy in an

empty lot in the small town of Minsersville, Pennsylvania.

Investigating a potential burglary, police approached the car to

question the two teens.

They were satisfied that no burglary was in progress, but they

suspected that Wayman and his date had been drinking. They also

found condoms in the car.

When the two young men were taken to the police station, they didn’t

just face questioning about apparent under-age drinking – they received a

stern lecture on the Bible’s supposed condemnation of homosexuality.

The officer lecturing the teens – F. Scott Wilinsky – had previously

worked as the high school football coach. When he was forced out of his

coaching position, he vowed to retaliate against all of his former players,

including Wayman.

Wilinsky made good on his threat when he was releasing Wayman from

custody. He warned Wayman that if he didn’t tell his grandfather that he was

gay, Wilinsky would take it upon himself to disclose the information.

Wayman went home and committed suicide.

As she went through the process of grieving her son’s death and

grappling with his sexual orientation, Madonna Sterling knew that what had

happened to her son was tragically unjust. So she decided to take action.

Represented by the ACLU, Sterling sued Wilinsky, the other police

officers and the town of Minsersville for misconduct and violating Wayman’s

constitutional rights.

Before a trial could begin, courts had to address the officers’

contention that revealing someone’s sexual orientation does not violate

constitutional privacy rights. The officers appealed that question all the way to U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

In a 2-1 decision, the court ruled that, "It is difficult to imagine a

more private matter than one’s sexuality and a less likely probability that

the government would have a legitimate state interest in disclosure of

sexual identity."Simply put: we won. One of the highest courts in the country

said it’s not the government’s business whether someone is gay – and it

certainly isn’t the government’s role to disclose or threaten to disclose that

information.

But that’s not all. The justices explicitly recognized the

constitutional rights of lesbians and gay men in rural communities.

Wilinsky had claimed that in a rural community like Minersville,

citizens have a lower expectation of privacy. His lawyers told the court that as

a police officer in a small town, he takes on a parental role, which the

community expects.

The justices directly addressed this, to express the court’s

"disagreement with the concept that the breadth of one’s

constitutional rights can somehow be diminished by demographics."

It came in a footnote to the ruling – which someone quickly reading the

decision could easily have missed. But the significance of this short

section cannot be ignored.

The rights of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people are

not dependent on geography. That’s not news to any of us. But a ruling

clearly spelling it out is an enormously valuable tool.

Now, nobody whose job makes them privy to such private information can

rationalize flagrantly homophobic intrusions by claiming that

constitutional rights might actually depend on where someone lives. This includes law

enforcement officers like Wilinsky, but also school staff and others

who work with youth – and who often have vast power in small towns.

This ruling also brings into focus the rarely-discussed issue of coming

out in rural America. For decades, we’ve known that coming out is the

strongest and surest way for lesbians and gay men to secure lasting equality. But

for some people – particularly youth or people in rural areas – coming out

might not be realistic.

This is sometimes the subject of heated disagreement. We can probably

all agree, though, that people can make that intensely personal decision

for themselves – and certainly that public employees have no business

disclosing anyone’s sexual orientation. That’s what this ruling says.

Madonna Sterling’s lawsuit can now go forward. The officers involved

and the city can be held accountable for their actions.

And LGBT people in rural communities can move forward, too, empowered

by a major court ruling specifically recognizing their constitutional rights –

and strengthened by a small-town mother whose fight for justice has, in

so many ways, already been won.