Connect with us

National

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is dead

Calif. court ruling means gays can serve openly

Published

on

DADT training

DADT training at Quantico, VA. (Blade photo by Michael Key)

A federal appellate court in California on Wednesday overturned a stay on an injunction that had barred the U.S. government from enforcing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” allowing gay service members to start serving openly in the armed forces.

In the case of Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the plaintiffs’ request to lift the stay of the injunction that was put in place last year by a U.S. district judge.

“Appellee/cross-appellant’s motion to lift this court’s November 1, 2010, order granting a stay of the district court’s judgment pending appeal is granted,” the decision states.

The decision to lift the stay on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” injunction comes from a three-judge panel within the Ninth Circuit made up of Chief Judge Alex Kozinski and Circuit Judges Kim Wardlow and Richard Paez.

After ruling in September that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was unconstitutional, U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips put an injunction in place to halt the enforcement of the military’s gay ban. The injunction lasted for eight days until the Ninth Circuit placed a stay on the order upon request from the Justice Department, making gays once again unable to serve openly in the military.

The ruling on Wednesday reverses this decision and once again allows for open service. The Ninth Circuit must still decide on the constitutionality of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but until it does, the anti-gay law will no longer be enforced.

Cynthia Smith, a Defense Department spokesperson, said the Pentagon is studying the decision with the Justice Department, but will comply with the court order and take “immediate steps to inform the field of this order.”

“In the meantime, implementation of the [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] repeal voted by the Congress and signed into law by the president last December is proceeding smoothly, is well underway, and certification is just weeks away,” Smith added.

The panel’s decision, dated July 6, notes that the U.S. government never asserted “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was constitutional in briefs seeking to uphold the statute. Further, the appellate court notes U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s announcement in February that the Obama administration determined that the Defense of Marriage Act — and laws related to sexual orientation — are unconstitutional.

“Appellants/cross-appellees state that the process of repealing [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] is well underway, and the preponderance of the armed forces are expected to have been trained by mid-summer,” the decision states. “The circumstances and balance of hardships have changed, and appellants/cross-appellees can no longer satisfy the demanding standard for issuance of a stay.”

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, which brought the case to court, said the Ninth Circuit’s decision to lift the stay “removes all uncertainty” for gay service members who are “no longer under threat of discharge as the repeal implementation process goes forward.”

“As a captain in the United States Army Reserve, I have observed the reactions of my colleagues to the Department of Defense’s move toward open service, and can say with complete confidence that our military is ready, willing and able to take this step,” Cooper said. “Log Cabin Republicans are proud of our role in ending this unconstitutional and un-American policy once and for all.”

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United and the sole military veteran plaintiff in the lawsuit, praised the decision for bringing about an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” at a time when certification is still outstanding to end the military’s gay ban legislatively.

“With the wait for certification dragging out beyond a reasonable time frame, the court has once again stepped in to require the Pentagon to stop enforcing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ and this time it very well may be for good,” Nicholson said. “I am proud to have worked personally worked with Log Cabin on this case for more than five years now and to have represented the gay military community as the sole named veteran on this lawsuit. Despite the criticisms and years of waiting, this case has yet again successfully eviscerated this outdated, harmful, and discriminatory law.”

Under the repeal law signed in December, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” won’t be off the books until 60 days pass after the president, the defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify the military for open service. Although training throughout the military has been underway since February, certification has yet to take place.

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said the lifting of the stay is “most welcomed” and could have been avoided if the president and defense leaders had certified repeal at an earlier time.

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of SLDN (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

“It’s the hope of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network that this favorable ruling will not be challenged by the Defense Department,” Sarvis said. “In fact, this whole matter could have been avoided had we had certification back in the spring. It’s time to get on with that important certification, end the confusion for all service members, and put a final end to this misguided policy.”

Dan Woods, an attorney with White & Case LLC who’s handling the case for Log Cabin, said the Justice Department can appeal the lifting of the stay to either the full Ninth Circuit or the Supreme Court.

“I have no idea what the government’s going to do,” Woods said. “And really they shouldn’t have appealed in the first place and they shouldn’t take this any further. They just should acknowledge, once and for all, that ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is dead.”

A White House spokesperson deferred comment on the Ninth Circuit decision to the Justice Department and the Pentagon.

Woods warned gay service members not to come out until the government makes an announcement and whether or not it plans to appeal the decision to lift the stay on the injunction.

“I’m urging people to sort of wait and see what the government does before people come out, but people should stayed tuned and see what the government’s next move is and maybe people will be free to serve openly in the armed forces very soon,” Woods said.

In addition to lifting the stay, the appellate court also grants the plaintiff’s request to expedite oral arguments in the case and states the case should be calendared for the week of Aug. 29.

Woods said the continued oral arguments — even with the injunction in place — are necessary because the litigation in the Log Cabin lawsuit is still ongoing.

“The only thing that’s really been decided is that the stay of the injunction,” Woods said. “The government is still arguing in its appeal that the injunction. It’s arguing that Log Cabin doesn’t have standing to bring the case and things like that, and we wanted to put these issues to bed once and for all and so we asked the court for an expedited hearing on all these other issues.”

NOTE: This post has been updated.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Lambda Legal praises Biden-Harris administration’s finalized Title IX regulations

New rules to take effect Aug. 1

Published

on

U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona (Screen capture: AP/YouTube)

The Biden-Harris administration’s revised Title IX policy “protects LGBTQ+ students from discrimination and other abuse,” Lambda Legal said in a statement praising the U.S. Department of Education’s issuance of the final rule on Friday.

Slated to take effect on Aug. 1, the new regulations constitute an expansion of the 1972 Title IX civil rights law, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in education programs that receive federal funding.

Pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the landmark 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County case, the department’s revised policy clarifies that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity constitutes sex-based discrimination as defined under the law.

“These regulations make it crystal clear that everyone can access schools that are safe, welcoming and that respect their rights,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said during a call with reporters on Thursday.

While the new rule does not provide guidance on whether schools must allow transgender students to play on sports teams corresponding with their gender identity to comply with Title IX, the question is addressed in a separate rule proposed by the agency in April.

The administration’s new policy also reverses some Trump-era Title IX rules governing how schools must respond to reports of sexual harassment and sexual assault, which were widely seen as imbalanced in favor of the accused.

Jennifer Klein, the director of the White House Gender Policy Council, said during Thursday’s call that the department sought to strike a balance with respect to these issues, “reaffirming our longstanding commitment to fundamental fairness.”

“We applaud the Biden administration’s action to rescind the legally unsound, cruel, and dangerous sexual harassment and assault rule of the previous administration,” Lambda Legal Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project Director Sasha Buchert said in the group’s statement on Friday.

“Today’s rule instead appropriately underscores that Title IX’s civil rights protections clearly cover LGBTQ+ students, as well as survivors and pregnant and parenting students across race and gender identity,” she said. “Schools must be places where students can learn and thrive free of harassment, discrimination, and other abuse.”

Continue Reading

Michigan

Mich. Democrats spar over LGBTQ-inclusive hate crimes law

Lawmakers disagree on just what kind of statute to pass

Published

on

Members of the Michigan House Democrats gather to celebrate Pride month in 2023 in the Capitol building. (Photo courtesy of Michigan House Democrats)

Michigan could soon become the latest state to pass an LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime law, but the state’s Democratic lawmakers disagree on just what kind of law they should pass.

Currently, Michigan’s Ethnic Intimidation Act only offers limited protections to victims of crime motivated by their “race, color, religion, gender, or national origin.” Bills proposed by Democratic lawmakers expand the list to include “actual or perceived race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, ethnicity, physical or mental disability, age, national origin, or association or affiliation with any such individuals.” 

Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel have both advocated for a hate crime law, but house and senate Democrats have each passed different hate crimes packages, and Nessel has blasted both as being too weak.

Under the house proposal that passed last year (House Bill 4474), a first offense would be punishable with a $2,000 fine, up to two years in prison, or both. Penalties double for a second offense, and if a gun or other dangerous weapons is involved, the maximum penalty is six years in prison and a fine of $7,500. 

But that proposal stalled when it reached the senate, after far-right news outlets and Fox News reported misinformation that the bill only protected LGBTQ people and would make misgendering a trans person a crime. State Rep. Noah Arbit, the bill’s sponsor, was also made the subject of a recall effort, which ultimately failed.

Arbit submitted a new version of the bill (House Bill 5288) that added sections clarifying that misgendering a person, “intentionally or unintentionally” is not a hate crime, although the latest version (House Bill 5400) of the bill omits this language.

That bill has since stalled in a house committee, in part because the Democrats lost their house majority last November, when two Democratic representatives resigned after being elected mayors. The Democrats regained their house majority last night by winning two special elections.

Meanwhile, the senate passed a different package of hate crime bills sponsored by state Sen. Sylvia Santana (Senate Bill 600) in March that includes much lighter sentences, as well as a clause ensuring that misgendering a person is not a hate crime. 

Under the senate bill, if the first offense is only a threat, it would be a misdemeanor punishable by one year in prison and up to $1,000 fine. A subsequent offense or first violent hate crime, including stalking, would be a felony that attracts double the punishment.

Multiple calls and emails from the Washington Blade to both Arbit and Santana requesting comment on the bills for this story went unanswered.

The attorney general’s office sent a statement to the Blade supporting stronger hate crime legislation.

“As a career prosecutor, [Nessel] has seen firsthand how the state’s weak Ethnic Intimidation Act (not updated since the late 1980’s) does not allow for meaningful law enforcement and court intervention before threats become violent and deadly, nor does it consider significant bases for bias.  It is our hope that the legislature will pass robust, much-needed updates to this statute,” the statement says.

But Nessel, who has herself been the victim of racially motivated threats, has also blasted all of the bills presented by Democrats as not going far enough.

“Two years is nothing … Why not just give them a parking ticket?” Nessel told Bridge Michigan.

Nessel blames a bizarre alliance far-right and far-left forces that have doomed tougher laws.

“You have this confluence of forces on the far right … this insistence that the First Amendment protects this language, or that the Second Amendment protects the ability to possess firearms under almost any and all circumstances,” Nessel said. “But then you also have the far left that argues basically no one should go to jail or prison for any offense ever.”

The legislature did manage to pass an “institutional desecration” law last year that penalizes hate-motivated vandalism to churches, schools, museums, and community centers, and is LGBTQ-inclusive.

According to data from the U.S. Department of Justice, reported hate crime incidents have been skyrocketing, with attacks motivated by sexual orientation surging by 70 percent from 2020 to 2022, the last year for which data is available. 

Twenty-two states, D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have passed LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime laws. Another 11 states have hate crime laws that include protections for “sexual orientation” but not “gender identity.”

Michigan Democrats have advanced several key LGBTQ rights priorities since they took unified control of the legislature in 2023. A long-stalled comprehensive anti-discrimination law was passed last year, as did a conversion therapy ban. Last month the legislature updated family law to make surrogacy easier for all couples, including same-sex couples. 

A bill to ban the “gay panic” defense has passed the state house and was due for a Senate committee hearing on Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Indiana

Drag queen announces run for mayor of Ind. city

Branden Blaettne seeking Fort Wayne’s top office

Published

on

Branden Blaettner being interviewed by a local television station during last year’s Pride month. (WANE screenshot)

In a Facebook post Tuesday, a local drag personality announced he was running for the office of mayor once held by the late Fort Wayne Mayor Tom Henry, who died last month just a few months into his fifth term.

Henry was recently diagnosed with late-stage stomach cancer and experienced an emergency that landed him in hospice care. He died shortly after.

WPTA, a local television station, reported that Fort Wayne resident Branden Blaettne, whose drag name is Della Licious, confirmed he filed paperwork to be one of the candidates seeking to finish out the fifth term of the late mayor.

Blaettner, who is a community organizer, told WPTA he doesn’t want to “get Fort Wayne back on track,” but rather keep the momentum started by Henry going while giving a platform to the disenfranchised groups in the community. Blaettner said he doesn’t think his local fame as a drag queen will hold him back.

“It’s easy to have a platform when you wear platform heels,” Blaettner told WPTA. “The status quo has left a lot of people out in the cold — both figuratively and literally,” Blaettner added.

The Indiana Capital Chronicle reported that state Rep. Phil GiaQuinta, who has led the Indiana House Democratic caucus since 2018, has added his name to a growing list of Fort Wayne politicos who want to be the city’s next mayor. A caucus of precinct committee persons will choose the new mayor.

According to the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, the deadline for residents to file candidacy was 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday. A town hall with the candidates is scheduled for 6 p.m. on Thursday at Franklin School Park. The caucus is set for 10:30 a.m. on April 20 at the Lincoln Financial Event Center at Parkview Field.

At least six candidates so far have announced they will run in the caucus. They include Branden Blaettne, GiaQuinta, City Councilwoman Michelle Chambers, City Councilwoman Sharon Tucker, former city- and county-council candidate Palermo Galindo, and 2023 Democratic primary mayoral candidate Jorge Fernandez.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular