Connect with us

Local

Couples plan courthouse visits to celebrate D.C. marriage law

Published

on

Aisha Mills and her domestic partner, Danielle Moodie, plan to mark March 3, the day the District’s same-sex marriage law is scheduled to take effect, by going to the courthouse to apply for a marriage license.

Due to a mandatory three-business-day waiting period, jubilant same-sex couples — some of whom have been in relationships for more than 20 years — won’t be able to marry until March 9 at the earliest. That’s when the D.C. Superior Court’s Marriage Bureau completes the processing of their marriage licenses.

But for Mills, president of the same-sex marriage advocacy group Campaign for All D.C. Families, March 3 nevertheless represents an historic day.

“The Campaign for All D.C. Families has been working hard for some time to ensure that all residents of the District of Columbia have the opportunity to wed here, and we are excited that it will finally become a reality on March 3,” she said.

Mills’ group and other local LGBT organizations were still finalizing plans this week for a celebration linked to a possible joint appearance by same-sex couples at the courthouse on the morning of the March 3 to fill out their applications for a marriage license.

“We have at least a half-dozen couples expected at the courthouse,” said Cathy Renna of Renna Communications, an LGBT-oriented public relations firm that’s coordinating plans for celebrating the start of the marriage law.

Under court rules, a $35 license application fee plus a $10 fee for a Certificate of Marriage, must be paid by cash or money order to enable couples to submit their applications. All this takes place in Room 4485 of the Moultrie Superior Court Building at 500 Indiana Ave., N.W.

Other groups involved in the same-sex marriage equality effort in D.C. that were expected to participate in a celebration March 3 include the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance, D.C. for Marriage, and D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality.

District resident Reggie Stanley and partner Rocky Galloway “definitely” plan to be at the courthouse on the morning of March 3 to apply for a marriage license, Stanley said. But Deacon Maccubbin and longtime partner Jim Bennett, owners of the recently closed Lambda Rising Bookstore, weren’t sure this week whether to join other same-sex couples at the courthouse that morning.

“Jim and I haven’t had time to sit down and actually work out how we want to do this — whether we want to be in that first wave or whether we just want to take our time and do it in the old-fashioned way, so to speak,” Maccubbin said.

But regardless of which couples are in the first wave — or which couple is the first to wed in D.C. — Rick Rosendall of GLAA said the shared moment will be special.

“Whichever couples happen to be first in line on March 3, and whoever happens to have the first [wedding] ceremony on March 9,” he said, “it will be a deeply satisfying moment for those of us who have worked to make it possible.”

Local same-sex marriage advocates expressed a sigh of relief Feb. 19 when a Superior Court judge denied a request by their opponents for a court injunction to stop the same-sex marriage law from taking effect.

The opponents, led by Bishop Harry Jackson, pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Md., said an injunction was needed to give them more time to organize a voter referendum that could overturn the marriage law.

Judge Brian Holeman denied the injunction request on grounds that the court lacked legal authority to block a law approved by the local D.C. government and cleared by Congress through its regular 30 legislative day review, which ends March 3.

Holeman, in a ruling delivered from the bench Feb. 19 and released in writing Monday, also said an underlying lawsuit filed by Jackson seeking to force the city to hold a referendum on the marriage issue did not appear likely to succeed on its merits. He noted the likelihood of the success of Jackson’s lawsuit was a key factor in determining whether to grant an injunction.

Jackson and his attorneys appealed Holeman’s ruling Monday to the D.C. Court of Appeals. Legal observers believe the Appeals Court is likely to uphold Holeman’s decision.

“In my view, the appeals court has no more authority to stop a law passed by the city and cleared by Congress than the lower court,” said Mark Levine, a local gay rights attorney.

Under the city’s election law, Jackson and his backers must complete a series of requirements for a referendum, including obtaining petition signatures from voters, by the time Congress completes March 3 its review of the same-sex marriage law.

Even if the appeals court were to grant him a stay, many observers believe it would be impossible for Jackson to complete the administrative requirements for a referendum by that date.

Jackson is separately appealing a D.C. Board of Elections & Ethics decision denying his application for a voter initiative seeking to ban same-sex marriage in the city. Under the city’s election law, Jackson and his backers have at least six months to complete the petition requirements for an initiative and an unlimited time to challenge the city’s denial of his initiative request through the courts.

The election board has on three occasions denied requests by Jackson and others for ballot measures seeking to overturn the same-sex marriage law. The board has based its denials on grounds that such measures would violate the D.C. Human Rights Act, which bans discrimination based on sexual orientation.

In addition to pushing for ballot measures, same-sex marriage opponents have called on Congress to either overturn the marriage law or force the city to place the issue on the ballot through a referendum or initiative. Most political observers believe Congress won’t intervene on the matter as long as Democrats are in control.

Capitol Hill insiders say all bets are off if Republicans regain control of Congress in the November election or sometime after that. But large numbers of same-sex couples will have married by the time a serious threat to the law surfaces in Congress.

“Everyone will see that the sky hasn’t fallen,” said Michael Crawford, a same-sex marriage activist.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Rehoboth Beach

Officials raise troubling concerns about Rehoboth mayoral candidate Suzanne Goode

Homophobic emails, ‘aggressive’ behavior cited: ‘It just seems to be getting worse’

Published

on

Locals are raising concerns about Suzanne Goode’s behavior. (Photo courtesy Goode)

As Rehoboth Beach voters prepare to elect a new mayor on Aug. 8, some city officials and local residents are raising new concerns about the behavior of City Commissioner and mayoral candidate Suzanne Goode.

In addition to a history of troubling emails in which she has used homophobic language and criticized the city’s rainbow crosswalks, Goode is being accused of inappropriate behavior by a neighbor and a fellow Commissioner related to a dispute on the Nextdoor online platform.

The Blade spoke to City Manager Taylour Tedder, Commissioner Chris Galanty, and others about Goode’s behavior during her time as commissioner.

Goode was elected commissioner in August 2024. Fellow commissioner Susan Stewart, who is also running for mayor, criticized Goode’s behavior in a March 9, 2026 meeting, bringing up emails outlining Goode’s offensive conduct toward city staff. 

In one email, Goode wrote to Rehoboth Beach City Solicitor Lisa Borin Ogden: “I am sorry that I learned from Google when you were first interviewed [in the] spring [of] 2025 that you are Jewish. My opinion of my fellow Jews declined significantly thanks to you since last summer. Actually would have thought you would have more compassion than the average person, based on your late brother. Except you don’t. I am sick of your haughty attitude toward me.”

In other emails, Goode questions why city officials encouraged CAMP Rehoboth and Clear Space Theatre to apply for grant funds. She has denigrated both institutions, referring to CAMP as a “questionable non-profit” and Clear Space as “second rate” with a “woke, drag queen bent” at times. She accuses Rehoboth’s LGBTQ community of displaying “their sex lives in public view” and fears physical violence from LGBTQ activists.

Goode disputed the claims and called for the city to remove Stewart’s remarks from the website.

The following statements were included in the emails sent by Goode:

• “Gays and theatre aficionados can donate as much as they like to these pet causes. Some taxpayers think the theatre is second-rate as community theatres go, and many dislike the RB emphasis on LGBTQ when heterosexuals don’t demand equivalent display of their sex lives in public view.”

• “Just because the LGBTQ community feels oppressed and discriminated against, that doesn’t mean that those who identify as LGBTQ are better able to recognize racial discrimination than someone like myself. It might surprise some of you to learn that I briefly dated an African American fellow college student.”

• “A performing arts and LGBTQ agenda isn’t appropriate for BOC spending when the city faces over $60M in debt.”

• “But there are some folks in town, who ironically have to remain in the closet (conservatives now have to do what gays had to do in the 20th century — ah, the irony) who object to the woke, drag queen bent of Clear Space at times. They have confided this in me, and thanked me for fighting for their tax dollars. Maybe I will regret speaking up, as some LGBTQ activist will attack me physically, even though I am a complete supporter of gay rights, and have as many gay male friends as female friends now that I live in RB with a large gay population.”

In the emails, Goode also referred to City Manager Tedder as “the mayor’s whore.”

Stewart told the Blade that the troubling behavior has since escalated.

Commissioner Chris Galanty spoke to the Blade about Goode’s behavior as commissioner and her issues with the rainbow crosswalks in town.

“Suzanne told me on two separate occasions that she didn’t like the rainbow crosswalks, and she said that she didn’t understand why they had to exist, and she didn’t understand why gay people had to advertise their sexuality, and she said straight people don’t have to do that.”

Galanty said that when he challenged her on this, she “moved very quickly to another topic.” He said that she has now shifted her perspective and is more concerned that the rainbow crosswalks are an issue of labor costs.

Goode told the Blade that, “Unfortunately, the rainbow crosswalks have potentially reduced the upkeep of the conventional crosswalks. But the rainbow crosswalks are attractive in and of themselves, and they do add to our recognition of Rehoboth’s longstanding status as a gay-friendly town.”

Accusations of “aggressive” behavior by Goode aren’t limited to emails. Last summer, Goode came to the home of Diana Jones, a property owner in Rehoboth Beach who is a neighbor of Galanty’s. Jones spoke to the Blade to share her experience with Goode.

Jones is active on Nextdoor, an online social network for neighborhoods. She said that she got involved on the platform during the time of the commissioners election last summer, in which her neighbor, Chris Galanty, was elected as commissioner.

Jones said that she made posts supporting Galanty. She said that someone posted a link of a lawsuit that involved Goode’s husband, Jeffrey Goode, who lost his race for commissioner last summer. Jones said that she reposted the link after it was taken down.

Jones said that the lawsuit was “very relevant to somebody who is running for city commissioner.”

Jones said that Suzanne Goode showed up at her house as a result of the post. Jones was out walking her dog nearby so Goode briefly spoke with Jones’s husband who was home.

“She came over to my house because she was saying I was doxing him,” said Jones. Jones said that Goode then found her as she was walking her dog and tried to talk to her about her Nextdoor posts, saying that she “brought up a very painful time in her life.”

Jones said that she has not had any communication with Goode since.

When asked for comment on the situation with Jones, Goode responded by saying “Diana Jones’s behavior toward me was despicable, and the way she has chosen to give her side of the story to news media says more about her than it will ever say about me.”

Galanty told the Blade that Goode came to his house in late June of this year when he was not home. She then called him about Jones.

“She relayed to me that she was having a disagreement with my neighbor on the Nextdoor platform, and she asked me to intercede with the neighbor,” said Galanty. “She said, ‘Please speak to her because I am frustrated with what she is saying. She needs to stop, and you need to say something to her.'”

Galanty said that Goode called him four times and texted him 32 times in the span of three and a half hours the next day.

Galanty said that he responded the next day, telling her that her behavior was inappropriate.

“Eventually it took a couple of weeks, but she apologized in her own way. She just said we just need to let it go.”

From his perspective as commissioner, Galanty said, “She likes to re-litigate things that have happened, six months ago, nine months ago. She likes to rehash issues that are in the past.”

“She can be really aggressive, and people are just really turned off by her,” said Galanty.

Tedder, who has accused Goode of creating a “hostile work environment,” told the Blade about his experiences working with Goode.

“She does not support the staff, and constantly tells us to resign,” said Tedder.

Tedder said that Goode texted City Solicitor Ogden at 7:45 a.m. on a Saturday, telling her to resign.

“Sometimes she does have good ideas. It’s just it gets so lost in these pages and pages of emails and thousands of emails that she sends,” said Tedder.

In regards to Goode’s behavior, Tedder said it has been going on since the beginning. “It just seems to be getting worse.”

Continue Reading

Maryland

Advocates for trans students urge Md. to fight White House threats

Four school districts under federal investigation

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

By JESSICA CALEFATI | Allies of transgender children are urging state education officials to fight back against the Trump-Vance administration, which has threatened to punish a growing number of Maryland school districts over local policies that affirm students’ gender identities.

The advocates testified Tuesday morning before the Maryland State Board of Education — one day after the U.S. Education and Justice departments alleged that Anne Arundel County’s school system violated federal student privacy law by withholding a student’s gender identity from their parents. A spokesperson for the district said Monday legal counsel had not yet reviewed the claims and that the district had no further comment.

School districts in Prince George’s, Montgomery, and Frederick Counties were already under investigation for allegedly violating Title IX, the civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination. The federal government last month threatened to revoke funding from the districts because they allow trans students to use restrooms and locker rooms that align with their identities.

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.

Continue Reading

Maryland

White House threatens Anne Arundel schools over gender identity policy

District faces possible legal action or loss of federal funding

Published

on

The U.S. Education and Justice Departments together determined Anne Arundel County’s school system violated federal student privacy law by withholding information about a student’s gender identity from the child’s parents. (Photo by Ulysses Muñoz for the Baltimore Banner)

By JESSICA CALEFATI | The Trump-Vance administration on Monday threatened to punish Anne Arundel County’s school system with legal action or the loss of federal funding for allegedly withholding information about a student’s gender identity and transition from the child’s parents.

The U.S. Education and Justice Departments together determined that the suburban Maryland district treats students’ gender identities as confidential medical information that cannot be shared with parents, in violation of federal student privacy law, according to a news release. A federal lawsuit filed against the district earlier this month made similar claims.

“As a mother and a grandmother, it is unconscionable that any school district would hide the most sensitive information about children in their care from their own parents,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement. “This is not only an affront to basic moral principles, but also to parents’ rights under federal law.”

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.

Continue Reading

Popular