National
Rising Cain
GOP frontrunner attacked from left and right over marriage

The new GOP presidential frontrunner continues to make headlines on LGBT issues as both pro-LGBT advocates and anti-gay forces express concerns about his candidacy.
Hermain Cain, former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, said Sunday in an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he wouldn’t push for a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage if he were elected president.
“I wouldn’t seek a constitutional ban for same sex marriage, but I am pro-traditional marriage,” Cain said.
Pressed by host David Gregory on whether states should decide the issue for themselves, Cain replied, “They would make up their own minds, yes.”
Cain’s remarks on “Meet the Press” echo comments he made in June during a New Hampshire presidential debate in which he said the issue of marriage should be a “state’s decision.”
The candidate’s lack of support for a Federal Marriage Amendment differentiates him from other Republican candidates — including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Rep. Michele Bachmann and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum — who’ve called for a Federal Marriage Amendment banning same-sex marriage throughout the country.
The former pizza magnate has come under fire from social conservatives for not endorsing a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage as other GOP candidates have done.
In an interview Sunday with Radio Iowa, Santorum said Cain wouldn’t defend the family as president and compared his position on marriage to President Obama’s.
“The idea that this issue should be left to the states is the position Barack Obama takes and it’s not the right position,” Santorum said. “There needs to be a uniform definition of marriage in this country.”
The National Organization for Marriage has also targeted Cain for not signing the organization’s pledge to oppose marriage equality as president by backing a Federal Marriage Amendment and defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court.
Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, said in an e-mail to supporters earlier this month that he hopes Cain will come around to endorse a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
“Cain’s comments on a federal marriage amendment have not always been crystal clear and consistent,” Brown said. “I personally hope that means he is in the process of ‘evolving’ on the issue, as the campaign moves forward.”
Despite his position on the amendment, Cain’s lack of support for a Federal Marriage Amendment isn’t winning him any support from LGBT advocates.
Dan Pinello, a gay government professor at the City University of New York, said the LGBT community shouldn’t look to Cain as being more sympathetic than the other Republican candidates.
“The difference among those right-wing Republican candidates on LGBT issues is the difference between Tweedledum and Tweedledee,” Pinello said, “It’s just as simple as that. There isn’t any consequential difference. They hate us, generally, period.”
Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, questioned the authenticity of Cain’s remarks on Sunday and said the candidate has “been all over the map” on a constitutional amendment on same-sex marriage.
“It’s not entirely clear where he stands on this,” Cole-Schwartz said. “Certainly his positions have not been consistent.”
In 2004, while running as a U.S. Senate candidate in Georgia, Cain issued a statement against the Masssachusetts court decision that brought marriage equality to the Bay State and called for a U.S. constitutional amendment to rescind the ruling.
“The courts have failed the American people,” Cain said at the time. “Congress needs to enact a constitutional amendment to protect the sacred institution of marriage.”
Cain continued, “Liberal-minded judges have opened a floodgate of judicial tyranny that will chip away at the core values of this country until nothing sacred is left! It started with not allowing prayer in schools, not being able to display the Ten Commandments, attempting to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance and now making same-sex marriages legal.”
The assertion that Cain’s position on marriage is the same as Obama’s doesn’t hold up.
For starters, in addition to opposing a Federal Marriage Amendment, Obama voted against the measure as a U.S. senator. Cain has also pledged to defend DOMA in court and has criticized Obama for dropping his defense of the 1996 anti-gay statute in court cases.
Cain also came under fire from LGBT advocates earlier this month for saying that he believes homosexuality is a choice and science hasn’t proven otherwise.
Additionally, Cain said in a January radio interview with anti-gay conservative Bryan Fischer that he would veto the Employment Non-Discrimination Act if it reached his desk. Said Cain, “I would veto that relative to special rights to homosexuals.”
Cole-Schwartz said a Cain presidency would “be a tremendous problem for the LGBT community” based on the candidate’s positions and history.
“Just recently, his comments that being gay is a choice and suggesting that the science proves his point just shows that these are not issues that he has spent time thinking about in a positive way,” Cole-Schwartz said.
Even so, Cain’s positions on some LGBT issues continue to differentiate him among the other Republican candidates.
Earlier this month, Cain told the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein he has no problems with openly gay people serving in the military and wouldn’t seek to reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” if elected president.
“I will not seek it, but I think it is a distraction at this point,” Cain said. “Wherever the military is, the day that I take office, I’m not going to stir that pot because I think it’s an unnecessary distraction at this point.”
Other Republican presidential candidates — including Santorum and Bachmann — have said they would reinstate the gay ban.
However, Cain added he will “listen” if military leaders want “something different” on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and said if it were never repealed, he would have “been fine with it.”
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said Cain has often been “inconsistent” on LGBT issues over the course of his campaign.
“I do think on a macro he’s much more approachable, but there has been some back and forth,” Cooper said. “He’s in a sense demurring in larger public fora on these issues, but when you put him before a more conservative audience, he seems to obviously lean a bit more right.”
Cain’s positions on LGBT issues could become of greater interest if he’s nominated to carry the Republican banner in the general election.
Several polls published over the weekend have Cain leading the Republican candidates or at least have him tied with Romney.
An NBC News/Wall Street Journal Survey conducted earlier this month found Cain leading the pack with support from 27 percent of respondents. Romney came in second with 23 percent of support.
A Public Policy Poll published last week gives him even greater national standing with support of 30 percent of responders while Romney comes in second at 22 percent.
Cain has become known for proposing a “9-9-9 plan” for tax reform, which would replace the current tax code with a 9 percent personal income tax, a 9 percent business transactions tax, and a 9 percent federal sales tax.
Whether Cain will remain at the top of the pack remains to be seen. Other Republican candidates — such as Bachmann and Perry — have shown similar strength in the polls, but later faltered. Romney has consistently been in first or second place in polls as the primary season has geared up.
Pinello said the reason for Cain’s current standing in the polls — as well as the rise and fall of other candidates — is because the religious right and the Tea Party factions of the Republican Party are “desperate to find” an alternative to Romney.
“A year or so ago, Sarah Palin had a flirtation with the Tea Party and the religious right, and then four months ago, the fascination was with Michele Bachmann,” Pinello said. “Then it was Rick Perry, then it was Chris Christie, and now it’s Herman Cain. It’s a series of infatuations with each of these candidates, which, for a host reasons tend quickly to crash and burn.”
Cooper said Cain has started a debate on tax reform with his 9-9-9 plan, but doesn’t think his candidacy will have much traction.
“I suspect that he’s enjoying what he’s doing, but I don’t think he really intends to go all way,” Cooper said. “Maybe this is his way of setting himself up for a potential cabinet appointment.”
Pinello predicted Cain’s standing would fade because of the candidate’s lack of money and organization. According to the most recent Federal Election Commission reports, Cain has raised $5.3 million thus far in the election cycle, while Romney has raised $32.2 million and Perry has raised $17.1 million.
“He just relied entirely upon these debates for promoting himself, and that’s not adequate in a rigorous primary, let alone a general election,” Pinello said. “So, I think he’s a flash in the pan just like the others were. Next month, it’ll be someone else.”
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 Court
Supreme Court rules parents must have option to opt children out of LGBTQ-specific lessons
Mahmoud v. Taylor case comes from Montgomery County, Md.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday ruled that public schools must give advance notice to parents and allow them the opportunity to opt their children out of lessons or classroom instruction on matters of gender and sexuality that conflict with their religious beliefs.
Mahmoud v. Taylor was decided 6-3 along party lines, with conservative Justice Samuel Alito authoring the majority opinion and liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson in dissent.
Parents from diverse religious backgrounds sued to challenge the policy in Maryland’s Montgomery County Public Schools when storybooks featuring LGBTQ characters were added to the elementary school English curriculum in 2022.
The school board argued in the brief submitted to the Supreme Court that “the storybooks themselves do not instruct about gender or sexuality. They are not textbooks. They merely introduce students to characters who are LGBTQ or have LGBTQfamily members, and those characters’ experiences and points of view.”
Advocacy groups dedicated to advancing free speech and expression filed amicus briefs in support of the district.
PEN America argued the case should be viewed in the context of broader efforts to censor and restrict what is available and allowable in public schools, for instance by passing book bans and “Don’t Say Gay” laws.
The ACLU said the policy of not allowing opt-outs is religion-neutral, writing that the Supreme Court should apply rational basis review, which requires only that the school district show that its conduct was “rationally related” to a “legitimate” government interest.
LGBTQ groups also objected to the challenge against the district’s policy, with many submitting amici briefs including: the National Center for Lesbian Rights, GLAD Law, Family Equality, COLAGE, Lambda Legal, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, PFLAG., and the National Women’s Law Center.
The Human Rights Campaign did not submit a brief but did issue a statement by the group’s President Kelley Robinson: “LGBTQ+ stories matter. They matter so students can see themselves and their families in the books they read–so they can know they’re not alone.”
“And they matter for all students who need to learn about the world around them and understand that while we may all be different, we all deserve to be valued and loved,” she said. “All students lose when we limit what they can learn, what they can read, and what their teachers can say. The Supreme Court should reject this attempt to silence our educators and ban our stories.”
Federal Government
White House finds Calif. violated Title IX by allowing trans athletes in school sports
Education Department threatens ‘imminent enforcement action’

The Trump-Vance administration announced on Wednesday that California’s Interscholastic Federation and Department of Education violated federal Title IX rules for allowing transgender girls to compete in school sports.
In a press release, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights threatened “imminent enforcement action” including “referral to the U.S. Department of Justice” and the withholding of federal education funding for the state if the parties do not “agree to change these unlawful practices within 10 days.”
The agency specified that to come into compliance; California must enforce a ban excluding transgender student athletes and reclaim any titles, records, and awards they had won.
Federal investigations of the California Interscholastic Federation and the state’s Department of Education were begun in February and April, respectively. The Justice Department sued Maine in April for allowing trans athletes to compete and refusing a similar proposal to certify compliance within 10 days.
Broadly, the Trump-Vance administration’s position is that girls who are made to compete against trans opponents or alongside trans teammates are unfairly disadvantaged, robbed of opportunities like athletics scholarships, and faced with increased risk of injury — constituting actionable claims of unlawful sex discrimination under Title IX.
This marks a major departure from how the previous administration enforced the law. For example, the Department of Education issued new Title IX guidelines in April 2024 that instructed schools and educational institutions covered by the statute to not enforce categorical bans against trans athletes, instead allowing for limited restrictions on eligibility if necessary to ensure fairness or safety at the high school or college level.
Sports aside, 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.
A number of high profile Democrats, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, have recently questioned or challenged the party’s position on transgender athletes, as noted in a statement by Education Secretary Linda McMahon included in Wednesday’s announcement.
“Although Gov. Gavin Newsom admitted months ago it was ‘deeply unfair’ to allow men to compete in women’s sports, both the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation continued as recently as a few weeks ago to allow men to steal female athletes’ well-deserved accolades and to subject them to the indignity of unfair and unsafe competitions.”
-
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
-
National4 days ago
Evan Wolfson on the 10-year legacy of marriage equality
-
India4 days ago
Indian court rules a transgender woman is a woman