National
Clock is ticking for N.J. marriage bill
The only out lawmaker in the New Jersey Legislature said the state’s pending marriage legislation “could go either way” and cautioned against bringing the bill to a vote if supporters don’t think they have sufficient support.
Reed Gusciora, a gay Democrat and sponsor of the marriage bill in the Assembly, said in an interview with DC Agenda that prospects of passing the legislation dimmed after Gov. Jon Corzine (D) failed in his bid for re-election last month and following losses for same-sex marriage in Maine and New York.
“It could go either way,” he said. “A lot of legislators, unfortunately, are taking a second look at the issue. … There’s always an argument not to do it and to fall in line with these other states.”
Even so, Gusciora, who’s also deputy majority leader of the Assembly, said New Jersey has a chance of passing same-sex marriage because of the Garden State’s liberal leanings.
“It still has a shot because New Jersey, at the end of the day, is a fairly progressive state,” he said. “It’s just a matter of my colleagues voting for the bill, which otherwise they should have.”
Supporters of gay nuptials are under the gun to pass same-sex marriage. Corzine has said he’d sign marriage legislation if it reaches his desk, but his failure to win re-election means he’ll soon leave the governor’s mansion. On Jan. 19, his successor, Republican Chris Christie will take office, and he’s pledged to veto any same-sex marriage bill that passes the legislature.
On Monday, Christie reiterated his opposition to the marriage bill in response to criticism from rock star and New Jersey-native Bruce Springsteen, according to Newark’s Star-Ledger, although Christie’s opposition wasn’t as emphatic as it has been in the past.
“This is where the people of New Jersey obviously have differences of opinion,” Christie was quoted as saying. “There are lots of people who feel very strongly about same-sex marriage and believe it should be the law of the state, and there are lots of folks like me who believe that it shouldn’t.”
Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, declined to describe his organization’s efforts to pass the marriage legislation in the weeks before Christie takes office, saying he didn’t want to tip off opponents to his activities.
“I can inform your audience, which is mostly outside of New Jersey, or I could do what we’re doing, which is continue to work hard to win marriage equality and keep our strategy close to the vest, and that’s what I prefer to do,” he said.
Still, he said he would agree with Gusciora’s assessment that the marriage bill “could go either way,” calling it “an innocuous enough statement.”
“That can be interpreted as anything, so why not agree?” he said.
Gusciora said he thinks the legislature will take up the marriage bill in January when lawmakers return from the holiday recess. He noted that he’s expecting the Assembly to consider the legislation first, followed by action in the Senate.
The State Senate Judiciary Committee last week approved the marriage legislation, 7-6. A Senate floor vote on the bill was initially scheduled for last week, but postponed after supporters said they wanted to wait until the Assembly had public hearings.
Mike BeLoreto, Gusciora’s chief of staff, said he thinks the bill has “a good chance” of passing the Assembly, but in the Senate the situation is “still very close to call.”
“We obviously have more Democratic votes in the Assembly than they do in the Senate, so it gives us a wider margin if some members need to jump off for their own political or personal reasons,” BeLoreto said.
As for the Senate, BeLoreto said a favorable vote in the Assembly “will end up spurring some progress on the Senate side.”
Democrats hold a majority in the State Senate, 23-17. Senate President Richard Codey has said the bill lacks unanimous support among the Democratic caucus and Republican votes are needed to pass the legislation.
Charles Moran, a Log Cabin Republicans spokesperson, said his organization isn’t formally lobbying for the marriage bill because his group doesn’t have a chapter in New Jersey.
Nonetheless, he said he plans to send out an action alert to his group’s members in the state to encourage them to lobby their officials.
“We’re going to start sending out some blasts to all our internal lists of Republicans and say, ‘Contact these state senators and identify yourself as a Republican in support marriage equality,’” he said.
Moran said his group has identified five Senate Republicans that could vote to pass the bill. One is Bill Baroni, the Republican Judiciary Committee member who voted in favor of the legislation, and another is Jennifer Beck, who voted against the legislation in committee but said she’d consider voting for it on the Senate floor.
Gusciora said the bill should be enacted into law as a matter of fairness.
“We recognize Newt Gingrich’s three wives, Rudy Giuliani’s three wives and Britney Spears’ 72 hours of nuptials — and there are plenty of same-sex couples that have been together a lot longer,” Gusciora said. “They pay taxes like everyone else, they raise families, they’re allowed to adopt in this state, so it’s a matter of fairness.”
Still, Gusciora urged advocates not to hold a vote on the bill if support is uncertain.
The wide margin of failure of the marriage bill in the New York State Senate earlier this month, 24-38, spurred some people to question why a vote was taken if there wasn’t an assurance of greater support.
“I’m not into taking names,” Gusciora said. “We already know who’s against it, so I don’t think we have to take the vote. The other thing is that if there isn’t a vote, there’s always an opportunity to revisit the issue, so I would rather us not take the vote.”
Gusciora said the New Jersey state courts could take up the matter should lawmakers fail to act. While no marriage litigation is pending in New Jersey, Gusciora noted that someone could bring the issue before judges.
In 2006, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the legislature needed to create some form of relationship recognition for same-sex couples in New Jersey. In response, civil unions were enacted.
“[You] wouldn’t want conservatives to get to say, ‘You had your shot in the legislature, so why are you taking it to the courts?’” Gusciora said. “The court can always revisit the issue and say, ‘You didn’t go far enough — it should indeed be called marriage.’”
But if lawmakers fail to approve the marriage legislation before Jan. 19, Gusciora said it would be “unlikely” that same-sex marriage will happen in New Jersey legislatively before Christie leaves office.
“He said that he would veto the bill if it ever came to his desk, so it’s unlikely in the four or eight years he’ll be governor that he would sign it,” he said. “Things always change with everybody, but he was pretty emphatic.”
Goldstein said he didn’t want to comment on whether the marriage bill could pass during the Christie administration if lawmakers in the upcoming weeks don’t approve the legislation.
“We’re working day and night to pass marriage equality while Jon Corzine is governor,” Goldstein said.
New York
Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced
One of the victims, John Umberger, was D.C. political consultant
A New York judge on Wednesday sentenced three men convicted of killing a D.C. political consultant and another man who they targeted at gay bars in Manhattan.
NBC New York notes a jury in February convicted Jayqwan Hamilton, Jacob Barroso, and Robert DeMaio of murder, robbery, and conspiracy in relation to druggings and robberies that targeted gay bars in Manhattan from March 2021 to June 2022.
John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant from D.C., and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, died. Prosecutors said Hamilton, Barroso, and DeMaio targeted three other men at gay bars.
The jury convicted Hamilton and DeMaio of murdering Umberger. State Supreme Court Judge Felicia Mennin sentenced Hamilton and DeMaio to 40 years to life in prison.
Barroso, who was convicted of killing Ramirez, received a 20 years to life sentence.
National
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources
Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.
“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.
“These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.
It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”
The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question.
A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit.
While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.
Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.
“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.
“Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says.
Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”
Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”
Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.
“As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from the Washington Blade.
“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said.
The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”
It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”
The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society.
The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.
While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”
“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.
The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.
Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.
PHOTOS: D.C. Trans Pride
Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
Gerry Connolly dies at 75 after battle with esophageal cancer
WorldPride begins — let’s hope it ends well
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
WorldPride events round-up
Pope Leo XIV: Family based on ‘stable union between a man and a woman’
Marjorie Taylor Greene’s bill to criminalize gender affirming care advances
Lucky Pollo stretches its wings at 14th and U
-
a&e features4 hours agoLooking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
-
World Pride 20253 days agoWorldPride events round-up
-
The Vatican4 days agoPope Leo XIV: Family based on ‘stable union between a man and a woman’
-
Congress2 days agoMarjorie Taylor Greene’s bill to criminalize gender affirming care advances