National
BREAKING: Obama drops defense of DOMA
Controversial Clinton-era law deemed unconstitutional

The Justice Department on Wednesday announced it will no longer defend the controversial Defense of Marriage Act in two court cases.
In a statement, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said Obama that based on a number of factors, including “a documented history of discrimination,” that classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened scrutiny in court.
“The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional,” Holder said. “Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the President’s determination.”
The Obama administration made the decision as it faced two new pending cases against DOMA — Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management, which was filed by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, and Windsor v. United States, which was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The administration had deadline of March 11 to respond to the lawsuits.
But in the Second Circuit, where the cases are pending, there is no precedent for how laws concerning sexual orientation should be treated. The situation opened the door for the president to drop defense of DOMA.
LGBT rights groups quickly praised the decision. Many of them were critical on the president to discontinue his defense of DOMA in previous cases.
“The administration today acknowledges that there is no legitimate reason for this discrimination and therefore it cannot be defended under the Constitution,” said Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry. “This a momentous step forward toward Freedom to Marry’s goal of ending federal marriage discrimination and fully protecting all loving and committed couples.”
But Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriage, said in an e-mail blast to followers that the decision from the Obama administration amounted to “a constitutional outrage.”
“Why do we even have courts if the President himself gets to decide which laws are constitutional?” he said.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the National Log Cabin Republicans, criticized the administration for continuing its defense of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in court as it ceased to defend DOMA.
“This is just one more example of the Obama administration talking out of both sides of its mouth when it comes to equality for all Americans,” Cooper said. “Today Log Cabin Republicans call upon the Department of Justice to also admit that ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is indefensible.”
The Justice Department reported its decision to Congress; it’s now possible that anti-LGBT members of Congress could take up defending DOMA.
Still, Republican leadership in the U.S. House expressed displeasure over the decision. Michael Steel, a spokesperson for House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) criticized the timing of the announcement.
“While Americans want Washington to focus on creating jobs and cutting spending, the President will have to explain why he thinks now is the appropriate time to stir up a controversial issue that sharply divides the nation,” he said.
In a statement, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) called the decision from the Obama administration “a victory for civil rights, fairness, and equality for the LGBT community and all Americans.”
“Since its inception, the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act has long been viewed as a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution,” she said. “Today, the president made clear that he agrees – and I commend him for taking this bold step forward to ensure the federal government is no longer in the business of defending an indefensible statute.”
DOMA, passed in 1996, defines marriage as between a man and woman and allows states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdiction. The federal law denies more than 1,000 benefits of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”
New York
Zohran Mamdani participates in NYC Pride parade
Mayoral candidate has detailed LGBTQ rights platform

Zohran Mamdani, the candidate for mayor of New York City who pulled a surprise victory in the primary contest last week, walked in the city’s Pride parade on Sunday.
The Democratic Socialist and New York State Assembly member published photos on social media with New York Attorney General Letitia James, telling followers it was “a joy to march in NYC Pride with the people’s champ” and to “see so many friends on this gorgeous day.”
“Happy Pride NYC,” he wrote, adding a rainbow emoji.
Mamdani’s platform includes a detailed plan for LGBTQ people who “across the United States are facing an increasingly hostile political environment.”
His campaign website explains: “New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people, but private institutions in our own city have already started capitulating to Trump’s assault on trans rights.
“Meanwhile, the cost of living crisis confronting working class people across the city hits the LGBTQIA+ community particularly hard, with higher rates of unemployment and homelessness than the rest of the city.”
“The Mamdani administration will protect LGBTQIA+ New Yorkers by expanding and protecting gender-affirming care citywide, making NYC an LGBTQIA+ sanctuary city, and creating the Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs.”
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court upholds ACA rule that makes PrEP, other preventative care free
Liberal justices joined three conservatives in majority opinion

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld a portion of the Affordable Care Act requiring private health insurers to cover the cost of preventative care including PrEP, which significantly reduces the risk of transmitting HIV.
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion in the case, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. He was joined by two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with the three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson.
The court’s decision rejected the plaintiffs’ challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s reliance on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force to “unilaterally” determine which types of care and services must be covered by payors without cost-sharing.
An independent all-volunteer panel of nationally recognized experts in prevention and primary care, the 16 task force members are selected by the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to serve four-year terms.
They are responsible for evaluating the efficacy of counseling, screenings for diseases like cancer and diabetes, and preventative medicines — like Truvada for PrEP, drugs to reduce heart disease and strokes, and eye ointment for newborns to prevent infections.
Parties bringing the challenge objected especially to the mandatory coverage of PrEP, with some arguing the drugs would “encourage and facilitate homosexual behavior” against their religious beliefs.
-
U.S. Supreme Court3 days ago
Supreme Court upholds ACA rule that makes PrEP, other preventative care free
-
U.S. Supreme Court3 days ago
Supreme Court rules parents must have option to opt children out of LGBTQ-specific lessons
-
India5 days ago
Indian court rules a transgender woman is a woman
-
National4 days ago
Evan Wolfson on the 10-year legacy of marriage equality