Local
D.C. Appeals Court hears gay marriage case
City defends law halting effort to repeal same-sex marriage law
Same-sex marriage opponents Rev. Anthony Evans, left, and Bishop Harry Jackson talk Tuesday outside the D.C. Court of Appeals. A case before the court could force the city to put its same-sex marriage law before voters in a ballot initiative. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
In what legal observers called an unusual development, the full nine-judge D.C. Court of Appeals heard oral arguments Monday for a lawsuit seeking to force the city to put its same-sex marriage law before voters in a ballot initiative.
At issue is whether a 1970s amendment to the D.C. City Charter that allows voters to pass or repeal laws through an initiative or referendum can legally include a provision banning such ballot measures if they would take away rights from minorities.
The City Council added the provision to the charter amendment at the request of gay activists. The effort by same-sex marriage opponents to challenge the provision represents the first time it has been seriously questioned in more than 30 years.
All but two of the judges asked pointed questions that appeared to challenge the legal arguments presented by the lawyers on both sides of the case, taking on the role of devil’s advocate.
“The court asked a variety of probing questions, as they should have,” said Thomas Williamson, an attorney with Covington & Burling, which filed a friend of the court brief on the side of the D.C. government in defense of the law restricting ballot measures.
“But it seemed that a consistent theme in their questions was a sensitivity to the importance of protecting civil rights of a vulnerable minority, which is really what this case is about here — the right of same-sex couples to enjoy marriage and have the same status for their marriage as all other citizens of the District,” Williamson said.
Five of the nine judges, including Chief Judge Eric Washington, were appointed by President George W. Bush. President Bill Clinton appointed the remaining four.
Williamson and local gay rights attorney Mark Levine said it’s unusual for the Court of Appeals to hear a case for the first time en banc, or with all of its judges, instead of its usual practice of assigning a three-judge panel to hear a case.
One significant outcome of an en banc case is that the full court has the authority to overturn previous decisions it handed down either en banc or through a three-judge panel if the previous rulings would interfere with its intentions in a current case. Williamson said one possible ruling the court might overturn in the current case over the D.C. same-sex marriage law is the 1990s case known as Dean v. the District of Columbia.
In that case, the appeals court rejected a claim by a gay male couple that the city’s existing marriage law allowed for the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples because of the Human Rights Act’s ban on discrimination based on gender and sexual orientation. At that time, the court ruled that the marriage law restricting marriages to opposite-sex couples took precedence over the Human Rights Law.
In recent years, gay rights attorneys and D.C. government officials have argued that the Dean decision was no longer relevant because the City Council had since made sweeping changes to the marriage law, providing extensive rights, including marriage, for same-sex couples.
Austin Nimocks, legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian litigation group, argued the case Tuesday for Bishop Harry Jackson and other local opponents of same-sex marriage who filed the lawsuit seeking a ballot measure to overturn the gay marriage law.
Jackson initially filed his lawsuit before the D.C. Superior Court last fall, after the D.C. Board of Elections & Ethics rejected his application for a voter initiative calling for defining marriage in D.C. as the union between one man and one woman. The board ruled that the initiative would violate the provision added to the referendum and initiative law that bans such ballot measures if they would result in discrimination prohibited by the Human Rights Act.
The effect of the initiative, if approved by voters, would be to repeal the same-sex marriage law that the City Council passed and Mayor Adrian Fenty signed in December. The law took effect March 3 after it cleared a required 30 legislative day review by Congress.
Jackson then filed suit seeking to overturn the election board’s decision. In January, Superior Court Judge Judith Macaluso upheld the election board’s decision, saying the law cited by the city to ban such ballot measures was valid.
Tuesday’s hearing before the D.C. Court of Appeals came about after Jackson and his supporters appealed Macaluso’s ruling.
Nimocks sidestepped reporters’ questions about the appeals court judge’s comments, including those who challenged his arguments. He said after the hearing that his side is correct in claiming the 30-year-old provision in the D.C. Charter barring certain ballot measures violates the full District of Columbia Charter.
The city’s charter is considered to be equivalent to a state constitution, and legal experts say all laws enacted by the City Council and signed by the mayor must be consistent with any restrictions or limits set by the charter.
Nimocks argued before the court Tuesday that the charter amendment that created the city’s voter initiative and referendum system sets just one restriction on such ballet measures: a ban on voters directly deciding on matters related city funding or taxes.
He said the charter amendment, which the City Council passed and Congress approved, doesn’t allow further restrictions that would prevent a ballot measure seeking to curtail minority rights.
“The people have a right to vote that’s guaranteed by the District of Columbia Charter,” he said. “And the City Council cannot amend the charter. They cannot do anything to undermine the people’s right to vote.”
In his written brief, Nimocks also argued that the Dean case was still a factor that the appeals court should consider.
Todd Kim, the D.C. Solicitor General who argued on behalf of the city, told the court the charter amendment establishing the initiative and referendum system gives the City Council authority to make some changes in the system to carry out its “purpose.”
Kim noted that the Council wrote the charter amendment and that part of the purpose in creating it was to place certain restrictions consistent with longstanding city policy, including policies related to rights of minorities. The D.C. Human Rights Act, which was in place at that time, included a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation, Kim said, indicating the city’s overall policy and purpose was to protect the rights of gays and lesbians along with other minorities.
He also noted that Congress approved the charter amendment through its normal 30 legislative day review, further solidifying its status as a valid law.
In another development that pleased gay activists attending Tuesday’s appeals court hearing, Judge Phyllis Thompson, a Bush appointee, pointed out that D.C. voters approved a statehood constitution in the early 1980s that included a provision banning initiatives and referenda that would take away rights of minorities, including gays.
Thompson appeared to be challenging Nimocks’ arguments that voters should have the right to decide on the gay marriage law by noting that D.C. voters approved the ban on ballot measures seeking to take away rights for gays and others.
Legal experts have said the statehood constitution passed by voters had no legal standing because D.C. statehood — which many D.C. residents favored in the 1980s — could not come about without approval by Congress. Congress never took the proposal seriously.
But Levine and Williamson said Thompson’s decision to raise the issued shows that she, and possibly a number of her colleagues on the appeals court, are sympathetic to the city law banning ballot measure that would take away rights, including the right of same-sex couples to marry in D.C.
“Marriage equality has already brought critical rights and responsibilities to hundreds of same-sex couples, yet outside forces are determined to undo our progress,” said Aisha Mills, president of the Campaign for All D.C. Families, one of the local groups that lobbied for a same-sex marriage law.
“As the courts have uniformly recognized in upholding D.C.’s comprehensive anti-discrimination laws, no one should have to have their marriages — or any of their civil rights — put to a public vote,” she said.
Jackson was among more than a hundred spectators to attend Tuesday’s appeals court hearing. The spectators appeared to be equally divided between same-sex marriage opponents and supporters, with many of the city’s prominent LGBT activists in attendance.
In addition to Washington and Thompson, the appeals court members include Judges Vanessa Ruiz, Inez Smith Reid and Stephen Glickman, who are Clinton appointees, and Judges John Kramer, John Fisher, Anna Blackbourne-Rigsby and Kathryn Oberly, who are Bush appointees.
Court observers say a decision on the marriage case could come anytime between the next several months and more than a year. The losing party could appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but many legal observers believe the high court would be unlikely to take the case.
District of Columbia
Reenactment of first gay rights picket at White House draws interest of tourists
LGBTQ activists carry signs from historic 1965 protest
About 30 LGBTQ activists formed a circular picket line in front of the White House Wednesday afternoon, April 17, carrying signs calling for an end to discrimination against “homosexuals” in a reenactment of the first gay rights protest at the White House that took place 59 years earlier on April 17, 1965.
Crowds of tourists looked on with interest as the activists walked back and forth in silence in front of the White House fence on Pennsylvania Avenue. Like the 1965 event, several of the men were dressed in suits and ties and the women in dresses in keeping with a 1960s era dress code policy for protests of the Mattachine Society of Washington, D.C., the city’s first gay rights group that organized the 1965 event.
Wednesday’s reenactment was organized by D.C.’s Rainbow History Project, which made it clear that the event was not intended as a protest against President Joe Biden and his administration, which the group praised as a strong supporter of LGBTQ rights.
“I think this was an amazing event,” said Vincent Slatt, the Rainbow History Project official who led efforts to put on the event. “We had twice as many that we had hoped for that came today,” he said.
“It was so great to see a reenactment and so great to see how far we’ve come,” Slatt said. “And also, the acknowledgement of what else we still need to do.”
Slatt said participants in the event who were not carrying picket signs handed out literature explaining the purpose of the event.
A flier handed out by participants noted that among the demands of the protesters at the 1965 event were to end the ban on homosexuals from working in the federal government, an end to the ban on gays serving in the military, an end to the denial of security clearances for gays, and an end of the government’s refusal to meet with the LGBTQ community.
“The other thing that I think is really, really moving is some of the gay staff inside the White House found out this was happening and came out to greet us,” Slatt said. He noted that this highlighted how much has changed since 1965, when then President Lyndon Johnson’s White House refused to respond to a letter sent to Johnson from the Mattachine Society explaining its grievances.
“So now to have gay people in the White House coming out to give us their respects and to say hello was especially meaningful to us,” Slatt said. “That was not expected today.”
Among those walking the picket line was longtime D.C. LGBTQ rights advocate Paul Kuntzler, who is the only known surviving person who was among the White House picketers at the April 1965 event. Kuntzler said he proudly carried a newly printed version of the sign at Wednesday’s reenactment event that he carried during the 1965 protest. It stated, “Fifteen Million Homosexuals Protest Federal Treatment.”
Also participating in the event was Japer Bowles, director of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs. Bowles presented Slatt with a proclamation issued by Bowser declaring April 17, 2024, Mattachine Society Day in Washington, D.C.
“Whereas, on April 17, 1965, the Mattachine Society of Washington courageously held the nation’s inaugural picket for gay rights, a seminal moment in the ongoing struggle for LGBTQIA+ equality in the United States, marking the genesis of public demonstrations advocating for those rights and paving the way for Pride Marches and Pride celebrations worldwide,” the proclamation states.
About 30 minutes after the reenactment event began, uniformed Secret Service agents informed Slatt that due to a security issue the picketers would have to move off the sidewalk in front of the White House and resume the picketing across the street on the sidewalk in front of Lafayette Park. When asked by the Washington Blade what the security issue was about, one of the Secret Service officers said he did not have any further details other than that his superiors informed him that the White House sidewalk would have to be temporarily cleared of all people.
Participants in the event quickly resumed their picket line on the sidewalk in front of Lafayette Park for another 30 minutes or so in keeping with the 1965 picketing event, which lasted for one hour, from 4:20 p.m. to 5:20 p.m., according to Rainbow History Project’s research into the 1965 event.
Although the LGBTQ picketers continued their procession in silence, a separate protest in Lafayette Park a short distance from the LGBTQ picketers included speakers shouting through amplified speakers. The protest was against the government of Saudi Arabia and organized by a Muslim group called Al Baqee Organization.
A statement released by the Rainbow History Project says the reenactment event, among other things, was a tribute to D.C.-area lesbian rights advocate Lilli Vincenz, who participated in the 1965 White House picketing, and D.C. gay rights pioneer Frank Kameny, who founded the Mattachine Society of Washington in the early 1960s and was the lead organizer of the 1965 White House protest. Kameny died in 2011 and Vincenz died in 2023.
The picket signs carried by participants in the reenactment event, which were reproduced from the 1965 event, had these messages:
• “DISCRIMINATION Against Homosexuals is as immoral as Discrimination Against Negroes and Jews;”
• “Government Should Combat Prejudice NOT PROMOTE IT”
• “White House Refuses Replies to Our Letters, AFRAID OF US?
• “HOMOSEXUALS Died for their Country, Too”
• “First Class Citizenship for HOMOSEXUALS”
• “Sexual Preference is Irrelevant to Employment”
District of Columbia
Organizers announce details for D.C. Black Pride 2024
Most events to take place Memorial Day weekend at Westin Downtown
The Center for Black Equity, the organizer of D.C. Black Pride, the nation’s first and one of the largest annual African-American LGBTQ Pride celebrations, announced this year’s event will take place Memorial Day Weekend from May 24-27.
The announcement, released April 16, says that most 2024 D.C. Black Pride events will take place at the Westin Washington, D.C. Downtown Hotel at 999 9th St, N.W.
“With the theme Black Pride Forever, the event promises a weekend filled with vibrant celebrations, empowering workshops, and a deep exploration of Black LGBTQIA+ history and culture,” the announcement says.
It says events will include as in past years a “Rainbow Row” vendor expo at the hotel featuring “organizations and vendors created for and by the LGBTQIA+ community” offering products and services “that celebrate Black excellence.”
According to the announcement, other events include a Health and Wellness Festival that will offer workshops, demonstrations, and activities focused on “holistic well-being;” a Mary Bowman Poetry Slam “showcasing the power and beauty of spoken word by Black LGBTQIA+ artists;” the Black Pride Through the Decades Party, that will celebrate the “rich history of the Black LGBTQIA+ movement;” and an Empowerment Through Knowledge series of workshops that “delve into various topics relevant to the Black LGBTQIA+ community.”
Also, as in past years, this year’s D.C. Black Pride will feature its “Opening Night Extravaganza” reception and party that will include entertainment and live performances.
The announcement notes that D.C.’s annual Black Pride celebration, started in 1991 as a one-day outdoor event at Howard University’s Banneker Field, has inspired annual Black LGBTQ Pride events across the United States and in Canada, United Kingdom, Brazil, Africa, and the Caribbean. More than 300,000 people attend Black LGBTQ Pride events each year worldwide, the announcement says.
Full details, including the official schedule of events, can be accessed at dcblackpride.org.
District of Columbia
Trans woman files bias complaint against D.C. homeless shelter
Says staff forced her to stay in male sleeping section
A transgender woman has filed a discrimination complaint with the D.C. Office of Human Rights charging that officials with the Community for Creative Non-Violence homeless shelter refused to allow her to stay in the women’s section of the shelter, forcing her to stay in the men’s sleeping section.
The shelter, located at 425 2nd St., N.W., is one of the city’s largest privately operated homeless services facilities organized by the Community for Creative Non-Violence, which is known as CCNV. It was founded by nationally acclaimed homeless services advocate Mitch Snyder, who passed away in 1990.
The complaint, filed last week by Stephon “Lashawn” Jordan, states that Jordan and a cisgender female friend arrived at the CCNV shelter around 2:30 a.m. on March 22 after they obtained a ride to the shelter through the city’s Emergency Shelter Hotline.
“Upon arrival we were informed that we would have to complete an intake once upstairs at the female housing unit,” Jordan states in the complaint. “Once we arrived a staff member came out. The staff member stated to me that we don’t house transgender individuals in this unit and that I would have to go down to the male shelter unit,” the complaint says.
It says Jordan’s female friend told the staff member she was not going to leave her friend, who identifies as female, by herself in another location at the shelter. “The staff member did not want to hear it and said that both of you can go downstairs too,” the complaint says. “Once we got downstairs to the male shelter unit we asked to speak with a supervisor,” it says.
“Someone came, but the decision was that myself and my friend could go and sleep in the male housing unit,” the complaint states. “During our stay it was very humiliating especially using the restroom,” it concludes.
A spokesperson for the CCNV shelter did not immediately respond to a phone and email message left by the Washington Blade asking for a response to the complaint.
Transgender rights advocates, including D.C. trans activist Earline Budd, who assisted Jordan in filing the complaint, have said the denial of placement of a transgender woman in the female section of a place of public accommodation such as a homeless shelter is a violation of the D.C. Human Rights Act’s ban on gender identity discrimination.
The Office of Human Rights website explains that under its policy for responding to discrimination complaints, the complainant and the accused party are required to enter mediation to determine if the complaint can be resolved. If the mediation fails, the OHR website statement says, a full investigation is conducted that can take up to six months to complete. It says upon completion of the investigation, the office makes a determination of whether probable cause exists that discrimination occurred.
If probable cause is found, the case is sent to the D.C. Commission on Human Rights, which holds a public evidentiary hearing with witnesses before making a final decision on whether discrimination occurred.
Reenactment of first gay rights picket at White House draws interest of tourists
Organizers announce details for D.C. Black Pride 2024
Drag queen announces run for mayor of Ind. city
Trans woman files bias complaint against D.C. homeless shelter
Freddie’s to hold ‘Love Fest’ Drag Story Hour after bomb threat
Congolese lawmaker introduces anti-homosexuality bill
Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Europe and Asia
Boosting your rental property’s curb appeal
Kansas governor vetoes ban on health care for transgender youth
