National
Moderate senators back Pentagon’s ‘Don’t Ask’ review

Several moderate senators favor plans by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to study how best to implement repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ (DC Agenda photo by Michael Key)
Some moderate members of the Senate Armed Services Committee are getting behind the Pentagon’s review of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” without explicitly expressing support for repeal.
DC Agenda asked several senators of the committee for their thoughts on last week’s hearing on the law prohibiting gays from serving openly in the U.S. military — and their positions on overturning it.
During the hearing, Defense Secretary Robert Gates unveiled plans for a Pentagon study that would examine implementation of repeal should Congress decide to overturn “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Gates said he supports President Obama’s efforts at working to repeal the law and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen said he personally believes gays should be allowed to serve openly in the U.S. military.
Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) said, “the thing that stood out” during the hearing was how top military leaders “are looking at this issue.”
“Obviously, Mullen said that it needs to be changed, or at least moved through, so I thought that was a very interesting statement by military command,” Begich said. “That’s what I’ll be looking to, to see what their policy would be and what they intend to do.”
Asked about his position on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Begich said he’s waiting for the Senate hearings to finish and the Pentagon to complete its investigation.
“I think having the military step up to the plate and acknowledging that it’s a policy of the past and that they are now moving forward and recommending — or potentially looking at it is probably a good move,” Begich said. “But I’m leaving it to the military to help us guide us through.”
Also expressing support for the review was Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who said the law needs to be re-examined in light of the changes that have occurred since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was implemented in 1993.
“I support the review that the administration has underway in the Department of Defense,” she said. “I think ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ does need to be reconsidered in light of all the changes of the last 17 years, and I was impressed with the testimony from Adm. Mullen.”
Collins recalled that Mullen said during the hearing that other NATO countries that have lifted similar bans had encountered no problems related to combat readiness or unit cohesion.
“That was useful information to get on the record, and we’ll see where we go from here,” Collins said.
Asked whether she would support legislation at this time that would repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Collins said, “That’s not what is before us.”
“Right now, what’s before us now is to authorize the department to do a study of what the issues would be of changing the policy, and I support that, and that’s what the president has proposed, so we need to see,” she said. “I obviously think that the review is needed and that the policy needs to be reconsidered.”
Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) said Mullen and Gates “came forward with a very reasoned approach” to the ban on open service.
“They were careful in terms of how they laid it out and I think it’s absolutely the right way to go,” Webb said.
Asked whether he was ready to support repeal, Webb said, “I think everybody needs to let the process work, which is the commitment that Secretary Gates and Adm. Mullen made.”
Webb said he’s planning to be engaged in the updated analysis from the RAND Corp. on gays serving in the military, which Gates ordered as part of the Pentagon review. The senator added that, “it’s very important” as part of the review “to listen to the active duty military and to evaluate what they’re saying.”
While not expressing commitment for outright repeal, both Collins and Begich were more inclined to support a moratorium on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” if it came before them.
Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told reporters following the hearing that he was considering a moratorium as legislative action on the issue this year, although he said he’s not ruling out any option.
Collins said she’d “have to see what specific recommendations the administration makes, the Pentagon makes,” but added, “putting on some sort of moratorium on cases where, for example, a third party reports — it might well make sense.”
Asked whether he would support a moratorium, Begich said, “I think, especially if they’re reviewing it, they should not take any negative actions against individuals until they review this policy and what they’re going to do and how to implement it.”
Webb reiterated his support for the Pentagon review of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” when asked if he would favor a moratorium at this time.
“My personal belief is that people over here [in Congress] need to take the lead of the Department of Defense on this,” Webb said. “They’ve been very careful in terms of laying the way they should be analyzing it.”
One senator who wouldn’t offer his thoughts on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” when questioned by DC Agenda was Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.).
Asked whether he could answer questions on the issue, Nelson declined and said he had to make it to another engagement, adding, “I don’t have anything to say on it anyway; we haven’t had our hearings.”
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.