Connect with us

National

‘Don’t Ask’ repeal is priority No. 1 as Congress returns

Advocacy groups plan aggressive lobbying effort next week

Published

on

A gay veterans group is planning a series of events next week to highlight the need to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as the Senate could take action on the issue this month.

Servicemembers United is organizing a lobby day on Sept. 16 for gay veterans and other supporters of repeal to ask members of Congress to support passage of the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill and pending language that would lead to repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Additionally, the organization is planning on the same day an event for the same-sex partners of U.S. service members. Servicemembers United will also host a gala Sept. 17 at its office to raise money for the organization.

The events come as many repeal supporters are pushing for and expecting the Senate to take up the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this month after lawmakers return from August recess.

Michael Cole, a Human Rights Campaign spokesperson, said taking up repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is the first priority for HRC when lawmakers return next week.

“We are communicating with our allies on the Hill to let them know that we’re looking for them to finish the job,” Cole said. “We feel confident that the votes are there and that it’s time that we rid our laws of this terrible policy.”

Cole said the Senate reportedly is looking at the week of Sept. 20 to take up the defense authorization bill and the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” language in the legislation.

The upcoming lobby day and other events are intended to build pressure on Congress in the remaining days before the vote to move forward with repeal.

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the idea for the upcoming lobby day came after the organization and HRC jointly organized a similar lobby day on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in May.

“It’s something that has value outside of just the lobbying,” Nicholson said. “It’s an opportunity for vets from all over the country, supporters to get together and connect to socialize, to meet, to work together, collaborate.”

Nicholson said he’s expecting around between 50 and 100 people to attend the upcoming lobby day and estimated around 75 percent of attendees would be former U.S. service members.

But Nicholson said the lobby day next week would be different from the lobby day in the spring in many respects. One major difference will be that rather than simply pushing lawmakers to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” participants in the upcoming lobby day would ask members of Congress to support certain concrete actions.

“We’re focused on a different objective right now with this lobby day, which is the quality of the visits and the nuances of where the issue is right now,” Nicholson said. “We’re in a very different place right now than we were in early May and there’s some very specific procedural votes that are going to happen.”

Nicholson said the five actions that participants will ask lawmakers to take will be to:

• Oppose a motion to strike the repeal language from the defense authorization bill;

• Oppose any replacement or substitute amendment with respect to the repeal language;

• Oppose any other attempt to modify or remove the repeal language in the defense authorization bill;

• Oppose any filibuster attempt of the defense authorization bill as a whole;

• and support final passage of the defense authorization bill.

Nicholson said this approach to repeal is necessary because many members of Congress hold nuanced positions on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“People like Sen. Jim Webb can say, ‘I do support repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, just not this year,’ or ‘I do support it; I’m just going to support it within an expanded certification,'” Nicholson said. “So, we want to make sure that people who are doing our work have the detailed knowledge to be able to push back on these attempts to get around to actually voting for repeal this year.”

Additionally, the upcoming lobby day will differ from the previous lobby day because different members of the Senate are being targeted.

Previously, the repeal supporters had been working to influence the Senate Armed Services Committee to adopt repeal language as part of the defense authorization bill. Now that the committee has taken action to include the language in the legislation, the focus is on the Senate as a whole.

Nicholson said the targeted senators of the upcoming lobby day are Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.).

One senator that Nicholson said will get “special attention” is Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) because he’s the sole person who can ensure the defense authorization bill sees a vote this month.

Even though the Senate is the priority for repeal supporters because a vote in that chamber is imminent, Nicholson said the lobby day will also involve visits to members of the U.S. House, which has already approved the defense authorization bill with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal language.

“I’m a big believer in follow up and gratitude and appreciation,” Nicholson said. “And so, we’re also doing, where possible, we’re doing some visits with House staff to follow up and thank them for their support, especially for some of the members for whom it was hard to take this vote.”

Servicemembers United is the sole organizer of the upcoming lobby day and is not working with HRC to draw citizen lobbyists from across the country.

“We’ve grown to the point now where we can do something like this by ourselves, and so we decided to convene another lobby day,” Nicholson said.

Still, Nicholson said while previously Servicemembers United was able to rely on HRC to pay to bring people into D.C. from across the country, interested participants will now have to pay their own travel expenses

“They paid for a lot of tickets for people to come into town, and we don’t have that kind of money to throw down on this, so we’re obviously relying on people who are motivated and have the capacity to bring themselves here,” Nicholson said.

As the lobby day approaches, Nicholson said he’s feeling “fairly optimistic” that the Senate will pass a defense authorization bill that includes language for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, provided Reid brings the legislation to the floor for a vote.

“I think chances are pretty good that we’ll get that through to fruition if Sen. Reid brings it to the floor for a vote before they recess for election season,” Nicholson said. “If he doesn’t, I don’t know what to think. I sort of throw my hands up in the air at that point at that and say, ‘Let’s wait and see,’ because anything could happen.”

On the same day as the lobby day on Capitol Hill, Servicemembers United is also hosting a forum for the same-sex partners of U.S. service members.

Nicholson said the forum is the first ever for the same-sex partners of U.S. service members and is intended to facilitate conversations among those who are in same-sex relationships with those serving in the military.

“Partners are coming to meet each other to talk, to connect, to share their stories and experiences with each other to talk about they challenges, offer advice and get to know one another,” Nicholson said.

Nicholson said the event will be small in scale and estimated about 10 to 15 people will attend.

One component of this forum will be a meeting with the partners and the Pentagon working group that is developing a plan to implement repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Nicholson said he thinks this meeting will be similar to the meeting that repeal supporters arranged with the Pentagon working group for gay veterans in May.

“The Pentagon working group’s style with meeting with groups of people like this has been to let it be an open dialogue with some introductions and talking a little bit about their work and what they’ve been charged with,” Nicholson said.

Nicholson said he thinks that military partners would talk about their experience being the partner of a gay, lesbian or bisexual service members serving under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and advocate on their partners’ behalf.

Cynthia Smith, a Pentagon spokesperson, confirmed that members of the Pentagon working group are set to meet with the same-sex partners of U.S. service members. Still, she said she couldn’t yet identify which members of the working group would meet with the partners.

“We’re just going to discuss what impact the possible repeal would have on military readiness, unit cohesion, family readiness and recruiting and retention — the same thing we’re asking the spouses of heterosexual partners,” she said. “We understand their voice is very important and we want to hear from them as well.”

But could the same-sex partners of service members inadvertently out their partners under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” during the discussion with the working group?

Smith said the working group will establish guidelines prior to the meeting warning participants not to identify their partners.

“We’re going to establish ground rules that we don’t want them to out a partner,” she said. “Obviously, we’re going to establish those ground rules up front.”

Nicholson said he doesn’t think U.S. service members would be outed by same-sex partners because they “live under the cloud of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ just like their active duty partners.”

“They develop the same risk-aversion instincts as active duty gay and lesbian troops and are fully capable of avoiding the inadvertent outing of their partners,” Nicholson said. “This experience won’t be an unfamiliar one for them in that sense.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Treasury Department has a gay secretary but LGBTQ staff are under siege

Agency reverses course on LGBTQ inclusion under out Secretary Scott Bessent

Published

on

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A former Treasury Department employee who led the agency’s LGBTQ employee resource group says the removal of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) from its discrimination complaint forms was merely a formalization of existing policy shifts that had already taken hold following the second inauguration of President Donald Trump and his appointment of Scott Bessent — who is gay — to lead the agency. 

Christen Boas Hayes, who served on the policy team at Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) from 2020 until March of this year, told the Washington Blade during a phone interview last week that the agency had already stopped processing internal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints on the basis of anti-LGBTQ discrimination. 

“So the way that the forms are changing is a procedural recognition of something that’s already happening,” said Hayes. “Internally, from speaking to two EEO staff members, the changes are already taking place from an EEO perspective on what kind of cases will be found to have the basis for a complaint.”

The move, they said, comes amid the deterioration of support structures for LGBTQ workers at the agency since the administration’s early rollout of anti-LGBTQ executive orders, which led to “a trickle down effect of how each agency implements those and on what timeline,” decisions “typically made by the assistant secretary of management’s office and then implemented by the appropriate offices.”

At the end of June, a group of U.S. House Democrats including several out LGBTQ members raised alarms after a Federal Register notice disclosed Treasury’s plans to revise its complaint procedures. Through the agency’s Office of Civil Rights and EEO, the agency would eliminate SOGI as protected categories on the forms used by employees to initiate claims of workplace discrimination.

But Hayes’s account reveals that the paperwork change followed months of internal practice, pursuant to a wave of layoffs targeting DEI personnel and a chilling effect on LGBTQ organizing, including through ERGs. 

Hayes joined Treasury’s FinCEN in 2020 as the agency transitioned into the Biden-Harris administration, working primarily on cryptocurrency regulation and emerging technologies until they accepted a “deferred resignation” offer, which was extended to civil servants this year amid drastic staffing cuts. 

“It was two things,” Hayes said. “One was the fact that the policy work that I was very excited about doing was going to change in nature significantly. The second part was that the environment for LGBTQ staff members was increasingly negative after the release of the executive orders,” especially for trans and nonbinary or gender diverse employees. 

“At the same time,” Hayes added, “having been on the job for four years, I also knew this year was the year that I would leave Treasury. I was a good candidate for [deferred resignation], because I was already planning on leaving, but the pressures that emerged following the change in administration really pushed me to accelerate that timeline.”

Some ERGs die by formal edict, others by a thousand cuts 

Hayes became involved with the Treasury LGBTQ ERG shortly after joining the agency in 2020, when they reached out to the group’s then-president — “who also recently took the deferred resignation.”

“She said that because of the pressure that ERGs had faced under the first Trump administration, the group was rebuilding, and I became the president of the group pretty quickly,” Hayes said. “Those pressures have increased in the second Trump administration.”

One of the previous ERG board members had left the agency after encountering what Hayes described as “explicitly transphobic” treatment from supervisors during his gender transition. “His supervisors denied him a promotion,” and, “importantly, he did not have faith in the EEO complaint process” to see the issues with discrimination resolved, Hayes said. “And so he decided to just leave, which was, of course, such a loss for Treasury and our Employee Resource Group and all of our employees at Treasury.”

The umbrella LGBTQ ERG that Hayes led included hundreds of members across the agency, they said, and was complemented by smaller ERGs at sub-agencies like the IRS and FinCEN — several of which, Hayes said, were explicitly told to cease operations under the new administration.

Hayes did not receive any formal directive to shutter Treasury’s ERG, but described an “implicit” messaging campaign meant to shut down the group’s activities without issuing anything in writing.

“The suggestion was to stop emailing about anything related to the employee resource group, to have meetings outside of work hours, to meet off of Treasury’s campus, and things like that,” they said. “So obviously that contributes to essentially not existing functionally. Because whereas we could have previously emailed our members comfortably to announce a happy hour or a training or something like that, now they have to text each other personally to gather, which essentially makes it a defunct group.”

Internal directories scrubbed, gender-neutral restrooms removed

Hayes said the dismantling of DEI staff began almost immediately after the executive orders. Employees whose position descriptions included the terms “diversity, equity, and inclusion” were “on the chopping block,” they said. “That may differ from more statutorily mandated positions in the OMWI office or the EEO office.”

With those staff gone, so went the infrastructure that enabled ERG programming and community-building. “The people that made our employee resource group events possible were DEI staff that were fired. And so, it created an immediate chilling effect on our employee resource group, and it also, of course, put fear into a lot of our members’ hearts over whether or not we would be able to continue gathering as a community or supporting employees in a more practical way going forward. And it was just, really — it was really sad.”

Hayes described efforts to erase the ERGs from internal communication channels and databases. “They also took our information off internal websites so nobody could find us as lawyers went through the agency’s internal systems to scrub DEI language and programs,” they said.

Within a week, Hayes said, the administration had removed gender-neutral restrooms from Main Treasury, removed third-gender markers from internal databases and forms, and made it more difficult for employees with nonbinary IDs to access government buildings.

“[They] made it challenging for people with X gender markers on identification documents to access Treasury or the White House by not recognizing their gender marker on the TWAVES and WAVES forms.”

LGBTQ staff lack support and work amid a climate of isolation 

The changes have left many LGBTQ staff feeling vulnerable — not only because of diminished workplace inclusion, but due to concerns about job security amid the administration’s reductions in force (RIFs).

“Plenty of people are feeling very stressed, not only about retaining their jobs because of the layoffs and pending questions around RIFs, but then also wondering if they will be included in RIF lists because they’re being penalized somehow for being out at work,” Hayes said. “People wonder if their name will be given, not because they’re in a tranche of billets being laid off, but because of their gender identity or sexual orientation.”

In the absence of functional ERGs, Hayes said, LGBTQ employees have been cut off from even informal networks of support.

“Employees [are] feeling like it’s harder to find members of their own community because there’s no email anymore to ask when the next event is or to ask about navigating healthcare or other questions,” they said. “If there is no ERG to go to to ask for support for their specific issue, that contributes to isolation, which contributes to a worse work environment.”

Hayes said they had not interacted directly with Secretary Bessent, but they and others observed a shift from the previous administration. “It is stark to see that our first ‘out’ secretary did not host a Pride event this year,” they said. “For the last three years we’ve flown the rainbow Pride flag above Treasury during Pride. And it was such a celebration among staff and Secretary Yellen and the executive secretary’s office were super supportive.”

“Employees notice changes like that,” they added. “Things like the fact that the Secretary’s official bio says ‘spouse’ instead of ‘husband.’ It makes employees wonder if they too should be fearful of being their full selves at work.”

The Blade contacted the Treasury Department with a request for comment outlining Hayes’s allegations, including the removal of inclusive infrastructure, the discouragement of ERG activity, the pre-formalization of EEO policy changes, and the targeting of DEI personnel. As of publication, the agency has not responded.

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports

27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.

In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”

In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.

The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.

“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.

He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”

“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”

Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”

Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House

University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

Published

on

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Screen capture: C-SPAN)

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”

The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.

“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”

Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”

Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”

“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”

Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.

Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.

The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.

Continue Reading

Popular