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.”
Federal Government
RFK Jr.’s HHS report pushes therapy, not medical interventions, for trans youth
‘Discredited junk science’ — GLAAD

A 409-page report released Thursday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services challenges the ethics of medical interventions for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, the treatments that are often collectively called gender-affirming care, instead advocating for psychotherapy alone.
The document comes in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order barring the federal government from supporting gender transitions for anyone younger than 19.
“Our duty is to protect our nation’s children — not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions,” National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said in a statement. “We must follow the gold standard of science, not activist agendas.”
While the report does not constitute clinical guidance, its findings nevertheless conflict with not just the recommendations of LGBTQ advocacy groups but also those issued by organizations with relevant expertise in science and medicine.
The American Medical Association, for instance, notes that “empirical evidence has demonstrated that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression.”
Gender-affirming care for transgender youth under standards widely used in the U.S. includes supportive talk therapy along with — in some but not all cases — puberty blockers or hormone treatment.
“The suggestion that someone’s authentic self and who they are can be ‘changed’ is discredited junk science,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement. “This so-called guidance is grossly misleading and in direct contrast to the recommendation of every leading health authority in the world. This report amounts to nothing more than forcing the same discredited idea of conversion therapy that ripped families apart and harmed gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people for decades.”
GLAAD further notes that the “government has not released the names of those involved in consulting or authoring this report.”
Janelle Perez, executive director of LPAC, said, “For decades, every major medical association–including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics–have affirmed that medical care is the only safe and effective treatment for transgender youth experiencing gender dysphoria.
“This report is simply promoting conversion therapy by a different name – and the American people know better. We know that conversion therapy isn’t actually therapy – it isolates and harms kids, scapegoats parents, and divides families through blame and rejection. These tactics have been used against gay kids for decades, and now the same people want to use them against transgender youth and their families.
“The end result here will be a devastating denial of essential health care for transgender youth, replaced by a dangerous practice that every major U.S. medical and mental health association agree promotes anxiety, depression, and increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts.
“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice, and no amount of pressure can force someone to change who they are. We also know that 98% of people who receive transition-related health care continue to receive that health care throughout their lifetime. Trans health care is health care.”
“Today’s report seeks to erase decades of research and learning, replacing it with propaganda. The claims in today’s report would rip health care away from kids and take decision-making out of the hands of parents,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. “It promotes the same kind of conversion therapy long used to shame LGBTQ+ people into hating themselves for being unable to change something they can’t change.”
“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice—it’s rooted in biology and genetics,” Minter said. “No amount or talk or pressure will change that.”
Human Rights Campaign Chief of Staff Jay Brown released a statement: “Trans people are who we are. We’re born this way. And we deserve to live our best lives and have a fair shot and equal opportunity at living a good life.
“This report misrepresents the science that has led all mainstream American medical and mental health professionals to declare healthcare for transgender youth to be best practice and instead follows a script predetermined not by experts but by Sec. Kennedy and anti-equality politicians.”
The White House
Trump nominates Mike Waltz to become next UN ambassador
Former Fla. congressman had been national security advisor

President Donald Trump on Thursday announced he will nominate Mike Waltz to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N.
Waltz, a former Florida congressman, had been the national security advisor.
Trump announced the nomination amid reports that Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, were going to leave the administration after Waltz in March added a journalist to a Signal chat in which he, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other officials discussed plans to attack Houthi rebels in Yemen.
“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States ambassador to the United Nations,” said Trump in a Truth Social post that announced Waltz’s nomination. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role.”
Trump said Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as interim national security advisor, “while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department.”
“Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to make America, and the world, safe again,” said Trump.
Trump shortly after his election nominated U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Trump in March withdrew her nomination in order to ensure Republicans maintained their narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
U.S. Federal Courts
Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy
Two of seven plaintiffs live in Md.

Lambda Legal on April 25 filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of seven transgender and nonbinary people who are challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy.
The lawsuit, which Lambda Legal filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Baltimore, alleges the policy that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers “has caused and is causing grave and immediate harm to transgender people like plaintiffs, in violation of their constitutional rights to equal protection.”
Two of the seven plaintiffs — Jill Tran and Peter Poe — live in Maryland. The State Department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the federal government are defendants.
“The discriminatory passport policy exposes transgender U.S. citizens to harassment, abuse, and discrimination, in some cases endangering them abroad or preventing them from traveling, by forcing them to use identification documents that share private information against their wishes,” said Lambda Legal in a press release.
Zander Schlacter, a New York-based textile artist and designer, is the lead plaintiff.
The lawsuit notes he legally changed his name and gender in New York.
Schlacter less than a week before President Donald Trump’s inauguration “sent an expedited application to update his legal name on his passport, using form DS-5504.”
Trump once he took office signed an executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers. The lawsuit notes Schlacter received his new passport in February.
“The passport has his correct legal name, but now has an incorrect sex marker of ‘F’ or ‘female,'” notes the lawsuit. “Mr. Schlacter also received a letter from the State Department notifying him that ‘the date of birth, place of birth, name, or sex was corrected on your passport application,’ with ‘sex’ circled in red. The stated reason was ‘to correct your information to show your biological sex at birth.'”
“I, like many transgender people, experience fear of harassment or violence when moving through public spaces, especially where a photo ID is required,” said Schlacter in the press release that announced the lawsuit. “My safety is further at risk because of my inaccurate passport. I am unwilling to subject myself and my family to the threat of harassment and discrimination at the hands of border officials or anyone who views my passport.”
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.
Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.
Lambda Legal represented Zzyym.
The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.
Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January. Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.
A federal judge in Boston earlier this month issued a preliminary injunction against the executive order. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven trans and nonbinary people.
-
U.S. Federal Courts5 days ago
Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy
-
Opinions5 days ago
We must show up to WorldPride 2025 in D.C.
-
Opinions2 days ago
TRAITOR: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has blood on his hands
-
District of Columbia5 days ago
Ruby Corado sentencing postponed for third time