National
Murphy confident Congress will overturn ‘Don’t Ask’ this year
The sponsor of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal legislation in the U.S. House is confident Congress will overturn the law this year — even as other lawmakers have indicated repeal may not happen until later.
In an interview with DC Agenda Tuesday, Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) said he believed lawmakers would overturn this year the 1993 statute preventing gays, lesbians and bisexuals from serving openly in the U.S. military and that he’s expecting Congress to take up the issue “legislatively in the next couple months.”
Murphy said the upcoming defense authorization bill could be a vehicle for passing repeal legislation. He noted that passage as part of defense authorization would give the Pentagon time to complete the study currently underway on the law.
“We usually don’t pass that into law until October of that year,” Murphy said. “October is about seven months away. That’s plenty of time for the folks to get ready to just put out to the troops that you need to respect not just one another’s race, one another creed, but also one another’s sexual orientation.”
Still, Murphy said defense authorization was just one way that Congress could enact repeal. Other options remain available.
“I think that’s one of the vehicles moving forward, and so I anticipate getting this done this year,” he said.
Murphy said momentum has been building toward repeal in the last couple months, leading to a position where Congress can overturn the 1993 law. In particular, Murphy cited the testimony Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen gave last month in support of ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“Now is the time when senior leadership in our military who are responsible to have the best policies for our young men and women who serve the country are calling for the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ — as has our commander-in-chief,” Murphy said. “So now Congress needs to get off the sidelines and get this done this year.”
Murphy said the growing number of lawmakers who have expressed support for repeal also is contributing to the momentum.
Last month, Murphy picked up another co-sponsor for repeal legislation in the House, Rep. Peter Visclosky (D-Ind.), bringing the total number of co-sponsors for the Military Readiness Enhancement Act to 188. Murphy said he’s received commitments from about two dozen other House members that they’d vote in favor of the bill should it come to a floor vote, which would bring the votes close to the 218 needed for passage.
Murphy also expressed enthusiasm for plans by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) to soon introduce companion legislation in the Senate and said the independent senator should be able to bring Democrats and Republicans on board.
“I know he’s committed to repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’“ Murphy said. “I know he knows the best thing for our military, and frankly, when it comes to foreign policy, I think he’s been one of the leaders in the Senate.”
Murphy said he’s expecting Lieberman’s bill to be similar to his in terms of doing away with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and providing for a non-discrimination policy. But Murphy said he’s unsure about other details, such as whether Lieberman’s bill will have a longer implementation time to allow the Pentagon to complete its study on the law.
The lawmaker is not alone in expecting that Congress will repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this year. On Saturday, Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said at a fundraising dinner in Raleigh, N.C., that 2010 would be the year that advocates would do away with the ban on open service in the military.
Despite these expectations, others have expressed doubt about whether Congress will repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this year.
Media reports have indicated the White House hasn’t provided Congress a clear path forward on proceeding with repeal. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) recently told DC Agenda the White House has been “muddled” on the issue and that he’s hoping the White House makes the path clear for Congress in coming weeks.
But Murphy said the White House has been crystal clear in that Congress should work to do away with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“The commander-in-chief has said that he wants the Congress to put a bill on his desk to finally repeal this harmful policy that has hurt our national security and has cost the American taxpayer $1.3 billion,” Murphy said.
Another voice of doubt comes from Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who said he’s skeptical the votes are there to repeal the law banning open service.
Levin has been floating the idea of a legislative moratorium on discharges, which he said lawmakers might more likely support because it doesn’t predetermine the outcome of the study currently underway at the Pentagon.
But Murphy called a moratorium “half-stepping” and said that full repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is still the way to go.
“This is a time when we need to make sure that we refocus our efforts on capturing or killing Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda,” Murphy said. “Now is not the time to have Chapter 15 investigations and hearing if someone is gay or straight in our military.”
Along with many other Democratic lawmakers, Murphy could face a difficult re-election campaign this fall. A number of Republicans have lined up to challenge the lawmaker, including Mike Fitzpatrick, the former House member whom Murphy ousted in 2006 by taking 50.3 percent of the vote.
Asked whether his public support for repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was having an impact on his constituents’ view of him, Murphy dismissed such worries about his re-election prospects.
“I wasn’t elected to worry about re-election,” he said. “I was elected to make sure that I’m fighting for the families of our military and to keep our country and our economy strong, and I’m doing everything in my power to make good on that special trust and confidence.”
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: Helen Hayes Awards
Laverne Cox, Reneé Rapp, Deacon Maccubbin named WorldPride grand marshals
House passes reconciliation with gender-affirming care funding ban
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
WorldPride events round-up
Pope Leo XIV: Family based on ‘stable union between a man and a woman’
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
