National
HISTORIC: Senate approves ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal
Congress wraps up legislative action on ending gay ban
Sen. Harry Reid, along with other Democrats, voted for cloture on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislation (Blade photo by Michael Key).
In a historic action, the U.S. Senate on Saturday passed legislation that would end the 17-year-old law prohibiting open gays from serving in the U.S. military.
Early in the day, the Senate voted 63-33 to invoke cloture on the legislation that would end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to move it to the floor. Later in the afternoon, the chamer approved the legislation by a vote of 65-31, effectively sending the measure to President Obama’s desk.
Clearing the 60-vote threshold needed to invoke cloture was the last significant hurdle for the bill on its path to passage and enactment into law.
For the cloture vote, six Republicans voted in the affirmative. They include Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), an original co-sponsor of the bill, as well as Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Scott Brown (R-Mass) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). Each had indicated prior to the vote that they support the bill when it came to the floor.
Additional GOP support for the legislation came from Sens. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio). Three Republicans didn’t vote: Sens. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).
Following the cloture vote, Voinovich told reporters he voted in the affirmative because he believes the U.S. military should accept Americans who are qualified to serve.
“If people are not qualified to be in service because of their sexual orientation, then we ought to say, ‘You can’t get in,'” he said. “But if we know that they are qualified, then we ought not to have them lying [about] who they are [under] ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ It just is inconsistent with common sense.”
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the sponsor of the repeal legislation, told the Washington Blade following the vote that he wasn’t suprised by Kirk or Voinovich’s votes because they privately assured him they would vote in the affirmative earlier in the week.
“For their own reasons, they didn’t want to announce it, but they were true to their word — God bless them,” Lieberman said. “So, six Republicans was great.”
Lieberman praised the bipartisan nature with which the Senate passed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in a conversation with reporters following the vote.
“There’s been a lot of difficult times in the last couple years because it’s so partisan to get anything done.,” Lieberman said. “Here we are coming together — and it was bipartisan. We wouldn’t have done it without the Republicans and we got something really good passed, so I feel good about it.”
For the vote for final passage, two Republicans switched their “no” votes on cloture to “yes”: Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and John Ensign (R-Nev.).
On the Democratic side, all members who were present voted in favor of cloture and final passage, but Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) didn’t vote at either time.
Earlier this month, Manchin voted against the motion to proceed on major defense legislation containing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal language. His office didn’t immediately respond to Blade’s request to comment on why he was absent.
Gay rights supporters were concerned that Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) would vote “no,” but he voted in the affirmative both for cloture and final passage along with nearly all of his Democratic colleagues.
The Senate invoked cloture to proceed with the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislation after a vote failed on moving forward with the DREAM Act, an immigration-related bill, 55-41.
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said the cloture vote shows that Congress has “recognized that all men and women have the right to openly serve their country.”
Solmonese also noted that the Senate was able to move “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislation past its most significant hurdle after many observers believed efforts to pass repeal this year were dead.
“Plenty of people had already planned the funeral for this legislation,” Solmonese said. “Today, we pulled out a victory from what was almost certain defeat just a few days ago.”
Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, called the vote a “historic step forward for this country” and said it “will very likely be a life-changing moment for gay and lesbian troops.”
“While we still have a long road ahead, including a final passage vote, the certification process, and a yet-to-be-determined implementation period, those who defend our freedom while living in fear for their careers will finally breathe a sigh of relief tonight, and those who have fallen victim to this policy in years past will finally begin to see true closure and redemption on the horizon,” Nicholson said.
The U.S. House earlier this week approved identical legislation, so when the Senate votes to approve final passage of the bill, the bill will head to President Obama’s desk.
Following the cloture vote, Lt. Col Victor Fehrenbach, an Air Force pilot who’s facing discharge under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” told the Washington Blade he was “overwhelmed” that the Senate finally took action to end the military’s gay ban.
“I didn’t think it was going to happen to be honest with you — at least not for a few years,” Fehrenbach said. “As soon as I heard my senator vote — Sen. Voinovich — I knew that we were over the 61 mark and I was pretty emotional over a while there.”
Fehrenbach said he felt “overwhelming happiness” not just for himself but for the estimated 66,000 other gay people serving in the armed forces.
“I’ll still be in limbo, but I know now that I’ll be able to retire in October, so it’s a great feeling to know that this is coming to end — that there is a light at the end of the tunnel,” he said.
In a statement White House Press Secretary Robert Gates confirmed Obama intends to sign the legislation passed by the Senate into law.
“As the president has long said, ending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ and allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the military, will strengthen our national security while upholding the basic equality on which this nation was founded,” Gibbs said. “The president looks forward to signing the bill into law.”
Gates called on to stop discharges
Now that legislative action on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is complete, increased attention is being placed on the Obama administration to issue an executive order barring further discharges until repeal is implemented.
Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, renewed his call for such an order during a news conference after the Senate invoked cloture on the legislation.
“During this limbo interim period, I respectfully call upon the secretary of defense — Secretary Gates — to use his existing authority to suspend all investigations and all discharges until the law is finally repealed,” Sarvis said.
The SLDN head said such a move is necessary from the Obama administration because the legislation still has to make its way to the Obama desk, the president and Pentagon leaders have to certify that repeal can happen and a 60-day waiting process has to take place.
Gay advocates — including Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese — have been calling on President Obama to issue an order stopping discharges since the start of his administration.
At the news conference, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he supports the idea of Gates issues an order to suspend discharges as the repeal legislation heads to the president’s desk.
Senate Armed Services Committtee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) also told reporters following the conference he favors such a move from Gates.
In a statement, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he wouldn’t issue such an order until he can certify that the U.S. military is ready for repeal.
“It is therefore important that our men and women in uniform understand that while today’s historic vote means that this policy will change, the implementation and certification process will take an additional period of time,” Gates said. “In the meantime, the current law and policy will remain in effect.”
A White House spokesperson didn’t respond on short notice to comment on the matter.
In October, Gates issued new guidance limiting the discharge authority for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to the militaries service secretaries in cooperation with the Pentagon’s general counsel and the under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness. According to the Associated Press, since that time, no discharges have taken place under the law.
Senators debate gay ban
Prior to the votes, senators on the floor spoke out passionately both in favor and against repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Opponents of repeal said the timing wasn’t right for Congress to act on ending the law as the U.S. military engaged in operations overseas, while those advocating for an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” said all able bodies — including gay service members — were needed to confront these threats.
Levin disputed the assertions of those who would call supporting “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal a partisan vote and noted polls showing an “overwhelming majority” supports ending the law.
“I’m not here for partisan reasons,” Levin said. “I’m here because men and women wearing the uniform of the United States who are gay and lesbian have died for this country, because gay and lesbian men and women wearing the uniform of this country have their lives on the line right now in Afghanistan and Iraq and other places for this country.”
Levin also noted that a provision in the legislation mandates that repeal won’t take effect until the president, defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify the U.S. military is ready for repeal.
“Secretary Gates has assured everybody that he is not going to certify that the military is ready for repeal until he is satisfied with the advice of the service chiefs that we had, in fact, mitigated, if not eliminated to the extent possible, risks to combat readiness to unit cohesion and effectiveness,” Levin said.
But Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said while repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” may lead to “high-fives all over the liberal bastions of America,” an end of the statute would threaten military recruitment and battle effectiveness.
“We are doing great damage, and could possibly, and probably — as the commandant of the Marine Corps said, and I’ve been told literally thousands of members of the military — harm the battle effectiveness, which is so vital to the support, to the survival of our young men and women in the military,” McCain said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), an opponent of repeal, invoked Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos suggestion earlier this week that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal could be a “distraction” that would lead to the loss of Marines’ lives on the battlefield.
“Some will say this is a civil rights issue of time,” Graham said. “The day has come. We need to move forward as a nation. The Marine Corps does not have that view.”
Graham railed against the decision of Senate leadership to prohibit senators from offering any amendments to the legislation.
“To those senators who will take the floor today and announce this as a major advancement of civil rights in America, please let it be said that you’re doing it in a fashion that those who have a different view cannot offer one amendment,” Graham said. “Does that matter? Apparently not.”
Reid had “filled the tree” prior to the vote to prohibit any senators from offering amendments to the legislation. Amending the bill would have sent the bill back to the House and could have killed the measure.
National
HRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey
Organization cites rise in homophobic, transphobic policies, worse mental health outcomes
The Human Rights Campaign is slamming the White House — and the Department of Education — following their removal of some LGBTQ bullying data from federal data collection.
The Civil Rights Data Collection is a mandated survey of all public school districts that collects figures on a wide variety of statistics about students — including demographics that include race, ethnicity, sex, disability status, and English learner status; course-level enrollment data, such as how many students are enrolled in advanced placement or honors classes; and school climate information, such as rates of bullying, harassment, suspensions, and expulsions.
That data collection has been ongoing since 1968 — nearly six decades — but now has a major change in what questions are being asked, or not asked, that advocates are largely attributing to the Trump-Vance administration’s culture war fight on LGBTQ children in the country.
Changes to the 2025-2026 survey questions — approved by the Office of Budget and Management in July — eliminated a space for schools to report how many students identify as nonbinary, how often those students are victims of harassment and bullying, and whether school districts have policies prohibiting gender identity-based incidents.
K-12 Dive, a publication that focuses its reporting on news related to K-12 education, first published a list of these data collection changes from 2024-2025 to 2025-2026.
These questions, as well as others that included LGBTQ student topics on treatment in schools, were added to the CRDC under the Biden-Harris administration. By including these questions, policymakers hoped this would lead to increased investigations into discrimination complaints, initiate compliance reviews, and provide policy guidance to districts, according to Education Department documents.
The CRDC also eliminated the mention of “gender identity” from the definition of rape and sexual assault. The prior collection of data (before the Trump-Vance administration changed it) defined rape as something that could be done to “all students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation, or gender identity.” Now, the new data collection questions say, “All students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation can be victims of rape,” removing “gender identity” from the new definition.
By removing and changing definitions, this could have a real-world impact on some of the school’s most vulnerable students. According to CRDC data from 2021-2022, more than 1,800 school districts reported enrolling one or more nonbinary students.
Additional data also shows that the changes to data collection is harming public school students. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee released a report in April finding that the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to all but close the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights has left students facing discrimination and harassment throughout the country without the federal recourse they are entitled to under federal law.
The Williams Institute, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, has data indicating the true number of nonbinary and transgender children is much higher — they estimate that for children ages 13 to 17, nearly 724,000 identify as nonbinary or trans.
This is in line with a slew of policies pushed by the Trump-Vance administration since their federal takeover. Within his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” This directive attempts to make the federal definition of gender unchangeable, determined by sex assigned at birth alone.
Within his first month of his second term, Trump issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.
He also pushed multiple anti-trans executive orders, including Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” and Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” targeting trans athletes and military members, respectively.
These policies have a real-world impact on trans people.
The Trevor Project, a nonprofit dedicated to crisis and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people under 25, reported that, for the seventh year in a row, LGBTQ youth are at higher risk for suicide as a result of mistreatment and stigmatization.
Trevor Project data showed that nearly 60 percent of LGBTQ young people ages 13-17 said they were bullied in the past year, and that 36 percent of LGBTQ youth seriously considered suicide in the last year. The data shows a bigger discrepancy for trans youth, with that number hovering around 40 percent considering suicide.
HRC President Kelley Robinson issued a statement following the approval of the new data collection questions that leaves LGBTQ students’ bullying statistics under — if not completely unreported.
“If there was even a shadow of a doubt, this latest move by the Trump administration makes it abundantly clear they do not care about the safety of LGBTQ+ students, and trans students in particular,” Robinson said. “These are adults who should be protecting our kids. And instead, they are making sure bullying and harassment are not tracked. If they are not tracked, bullying and harassment cannot be prevented or stopped — which is exactly what the Trump administration wants. Parents deserve to know their kids are safe at school, and every single young person deserves dignity and safety at school. Anything less is plain evil.”
HRC has a “Welcoming Schools” initiative that they say is the “most comprehensive” bias-based bullying prevention program in the nation. The program includes LGBTQ and gender-inclusive resources for schools, help navigating special education and disability resources for LGBTQ-identifying students, and other tools to help schools become more inclusive.
This program has been in effect for nearly two decades and, according to HRC, reaches nearly 750,000 students.
The Washington Blade reached out to both the Department of Education and Office of Management and Budget for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.
Michigan
Progressives score victory as El-Sayed wins Mich. Senate primary
Democratic newcomer will face Rogers in November
Michigan held its primary on Tuesday, allowing the two major political parties to select their nominees to go head-to-head for the state’s U.S. Senate seat.
NBC News called the Democratic race early, giving the victory to physician Abdul El-Sayed over incumbent U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in an extremely close primary. El-Sayed won 48.5 percent of the primary vote, with Stevens trailing by just one percentage point at 47.5 percent.
Both candidates have campagined on supporting the LGBTQ community through different avenues— for El-Sayed he focused on his past promoting HIV and PrEP funding and research. Stevens focused on her legislative history working to support transgender rights in the state.
This is a major win for progressive Democrats, who have been bearing the brunt of political attacks from President Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and centrist Democrats.
El-Sayed, a former health director in Detroit, ran his campaign largely on making life in the Great Lakes State more affordable amid rising costs. His policies include promoting “Medicare for All,” pushing health policy that targets the regressive efforts of the Trump-Vance administration that rolls back funding for both Women and LGBTQ people, minimizing the growing amount of money in politics, and he was very vocal in his criticism of Stevens for supporting aid to Israel. He was endorsed by two major progressives — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Stevens, the four-term congresswoman, is much closer to establishment Democrats on policy than El-Sayed.
During her time in the federal government, she has consistently supported the Equality Act, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She has also emphasized supporting local manufacturing and lowering housing costs in the state.
She was named to Advocates for Trans Equality’s 118th Congressional Champions list for her pro-trans policies and was endorsed by establishment heavy hitters Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
The contentious race boiled down not only to Michigan affairs but also extended to international conflicts — namely Palestine. (South Africa has filed a case in the International Court of Justice in The Hague that accuses Israel of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip after Oct. 7.) This primary also acted as one of the first major races that pushed back against AIPAC, a lobbying group that works to promote pro-Israel candidates in U.S. elections. The group has been involved in domestic politics since 1954.
AIPAC devoted a massive amount of money to this race.
The Associated Press reported that the pro-Israel lobbying group spent more than $30 million on ads against El-Sayed because of his vocal denunciation of Israel and his continued criticism of its policies towards Palestine.
Michigan has a large Muslim and Arab American population, which could, in part, explain how El-Sayed was able to win.
The Republican side was far less competitive. Former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) ran unopposed and clinched the GOP nomination. He has consistently held anti-LGBTQ positions, going as far as voting multiple times for a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, voting against repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and supporting efforts to directly target the attempted expansion of Title IX protections to include trans people.
El-Sayed will face off against Rogers in November for Michigan’s Senate seat — one that could have lasting impacts not only on the state’s politics but also on the Republicans’ narrow Senate majority and Trump’s political agenda.
National
White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits
Administration criticizes National Museum of American History
The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.
According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”
Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.
Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.
“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.
The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.
The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.
The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”
The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.
It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”
Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”
On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.
In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.
House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”
In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.
Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.
“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.
Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.
It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.
An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)
HRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey
Dutch PM: More needs to be done to defend trans rights
HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage
Perez Hilton’s live breakdown reveals social media mental health crisis
Mr. Henry’s to host 60th anniversary party
PHOTOS: Petal Release Party
My evening with Madonna
Remembering Elliot Leonard, generous visionary who helped LGBTQ communities thrive
Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028
