National
Gay soldier, vet seek trial for White House arrest
U.S. Army Lt. Dan Choi and Army veteran Jim Pietrangelo, who were arrested for handcuffing themselves to the White House fence in a protest against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” pleaded not guilty Friday in court.
During separate arraignments in D.C. Superior Court, the two gay men requested a trial and rejected an offer by the D.C. Attorney General’s office that they pay a $100 fine to end the case in a plea bargain arrangement known as post-and-forfeit.
The two were charged with failing to obey a lawful order to disperse after they handcuffed themselves to the White House fence Thursday along Pennsylvania Avenue. Lesbian activist Robin McGhee, who joined Choi and Pietrangelo in the White House protest, was arrested on the same charge after refusing to leave the area near the fence.
McGehee agreed to a post-and-forfiet plea and was released Thursday evening. U.S. Secret Service officers, who arrested her outside the White House, brought her to the First District D.C. police station, and D.C. police processed her arrested and extended the post-and-forfiet offer.
U.S. Park Police, who arrested Choi and Pietrangelo, processed their arrest at a Park Police facility and held both men overnight at the D.C. Central Cellblock until they were arraigned Friday.
A Park Police spokesperson said the decision to hold both men overnight was based on procedures related to their residence and identification documents. Spokesperson Dave Schlosser said Pietrangelo did not have any identification in his possession, and noted both men were from outside the D.C. metroplitan area: Choi from New York and Pietrangelo from Ohio.
Choi and Pietrangelo’s decision to request a trial came as a surprise to about a dozen activists who attended the proceeding. The activists, some of whom were arrested Thursday during a separate protest at the U.S. Capitol in the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, each agreed to the accept post-and-forfeit pleas, which has become the standard practice of most arrested Washington protestors.
Choi and Pietrangelo’s decision places the D.C. government in the position of having to prosecute the two men in what has become a highly publicized LGBT rights case. Under D.C. law, the city attorney general’s office prosecutes most misdemeanor cases under the direction of D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles.
Nickles received praise from LGBT activists this year for filing strongly worded court briefs defending the city’s same-sex marriage law against lawsuits brought against the law by a Maryland minister.
Although post-and-forfeit pleas are not considered guilty pleas, defense attorneys say the move amounts to not contesting a charge. The practice benefits both sides in the courtroom equation: prosecutors avoid the costs associated with trial, and defendants need not fear being found guilty during trial.
“I knew there’s no reason for me to say that I’m guilty,” Choi said after the court hearing. “I don’t think that I should feel guilty and I don’t think I should say I’m guilty. I want to have my day in court.”
The White House protest drew national attention and seemed to overshadow a separate rally against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” at Freedom Plaza, just blocks from the White House. The Human Rights Campaign and comedian Kathy Griffin organized the rally and said they were unaware of plans for the White House action until Choi, who spoke at the rally, called on the crowed to march with him to the White House.
Judge Jose Lopez released Choi and Pietrangelo on their own recognizance, and set an April 26 court date for either a trial or pre-trial hearing in their cases.
He told both men that although the maximum sentence for the charge they face is a $1,000 fine, the two men could be subjected to imprisonment if they fail to show up for scheduled court appearances.
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.