Local
Someday we’ll be together?
Bi-national couple describes pain, anxiety of navigating U.S. immigration laws
You’re waiting on your partner and he’s late.
Most gays in that situation might be mildly irked, especially if a dinner reservation or theater tickets are at stake. Even if a few hours pass, you realize the likelihood that something serious has happened is small.
But when Kelly Cross, a local gay attorney, found himself waiting more than two hours at the Foggy Bottom Metro station last summer with no sign of his partner, who was scheduled to join him following a stint in Europe, it was a much more serious situation — it could have meant the end of their relationship.
Because the United States doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage at the federal level — where immigration is handled — bi-national same-sex couples have few options for staying together long-term in the U.S. or anywhere else. The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) further complicates the matter.
Cross and his partner, who declined to be identified because it could increase his chances of being deported, had tried to make a go of it in Europe, spending more than a year together in Dusseldorf, Germany, but a bounty of practical considerations — most pressingly Cross’s cancer-stricken mother in West Virginia — made staying there untenable. Cross returned in June 2009. But on the July day when his partner was scheduled to arrive at Dulles Airport, Cross’s panic increased as time went by.
“I was going around calling all kinds of people,” Cross says. “I thought he’d gotten pulled over and sent to the detention center where they’re double- and triple-checking everything probably. They want to make sure these folks are not going to stay in the U.S. They have no idea of his life here, his friends and family. It’s terrifying to know that you could be traveling and get the wrong immigration officer and not be able to get back into the country and I would not be able to go back and say anything and have no right to appeal anything. We’re very much at their whim.”
It had already been a nerve-wracking month for Cross, 31. Since he’d returned to the United States, he’d spent a frantic month trying to find someone willing to give his partner a job. Without that, there was no hope for the partner to stay. Though the partner’s background is in public policy, he had some experience doing financial analysis in Europe and that led to a D.C. opportunity but one that they say is more of a temporary fix than a long-term career plan.
For the couple, who got serious quickly after meeting at Apex in 2007, it was just one more in a string of seemingly endless obstacles. The relationship is strong enough, they say, that it’s worth the constant anxiety and uncertainty.
Cross’s partner, also 31, came to the states from his native Poland in 2003 to study public policy at the University of Northern Iowa. Disenchanted with Iowa, he came to D.C. for an internship in 2006. Though he liked the U.S., he was planning to return to Poland or possibly somewhere else in Europe — wherever he might find a good job. His plans changed radically when he met Cross.
“This is an everyday concern, how are we going to survive,” the partner says. “In our situation, we’re lucky that we have sufficient funds to live in this not-very-pleasant situation, but I just cannot imagine if somebody is gay and working for McDonald’s and he has a boyfriend who is working for Burger King. I don’t think they are going to make it. They won’t make it for sure because they’re not able. But if there’s a couple who’s straight, they have all the rights and all possibilities to make it because it will be possible. A law that gives them the opportunity, one piece of paper, a marriage license, that gives all kinds of rights and we don’t have it.”
The couple did enter a New Jersey civil union last summer, but they say it was purely symbolic and has little practical benefit. The partner says although he understands the arguments of those who will settle only for marriage, he’d be happy with a federally recognized civil union.
“That would be fine, I don’t give a shit,” he says. “Just anything so I don’t have this headache every morning. I would be perfectly happy with a civil union.”
Cross and his partner are, of course, not alone. Immigration Equality, a gay rights advocacy group working to end discrimination in U.S. immigration law against LGBT people, points to Williams Institute figures based on the 2000 Census that indicate there are about 36,000 bi-national same-sex couples struggling to stay together in the U.S. They’re hoping the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), versions of which date back to 2000, will solve the problem. Because its wording says “permanent partner,” activists say it wouldn’t conflict with DOMA, though they’re hopeful — as are virtually all gay activists — that DOMA will eventually be repealed.
But how are the odds looking for UAFA? Immigration Equality’s communications director Steve Ralls is optimistic.
“Now that health care is officially behind us, there are indications that Congress and the White House are turning to immigration reform in the coming weeks and months,” Ralls says. “The White House has called key lawmakers to plot a way forward for comprehensive immigration reform and as part of that process, we’re working very hard to ensure that the Uniting American Families Act is part of that comprehensive bill.”
If it fails there — and many are opposed to its inclusion — it could pass on its own but Ralls says Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, supporters of the legislation, have told him they want to tackle a comprehensive bill before individual ones. U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), who introduced UAFA in the Senate last year, is a key ally, Ralls says.
“He’s chair of the Judiciary Committee, which has enormous influence on what immigration bills move through Congress when,” Ralls said. “He remains willing and determined to pass UAFA as a standalone bill if necessary. That gives us a legislative leg up right out of the starting gate.”
But if it fails, what are the options for couples like Cross and his partner? They’re few, they say. Moving to Canada is not practical because the antitrust law Cross specializes in is not viable to practice there. Cross says he was lucky he spoke German and that his England-based international law firm was able to transfer him there, but he took a large pay cut to do it.
His partner becomes indignant at the mere suggestion of moving to Canada.
“This question is not really appropriate,” he says. “Who the heck is going to tell me where I should live? … I am entitled to decide where I should like to live because I’m your partner. We want to live here. Nobody’s going to tell me what I’m supposed to do with my life. I’m not a random person who’s just coming and pushing to want to settle in the D.C. area. We have our life here.”
And though the immigration problem is by far the couple’s biggest challenge, Cross says it’s compounded by other factors that flair up occasionally. They have cultural, interracial and homophobic issues that pop up, mostly externally. Cross encountered it often when he was trying to arrange a job for his partner.
“There’s a different sort of worth people ascribe to a heterosexual relationship that they don’t ascribe to homosexual ones,” Cross says. “There’s a presumption that if you’ve found a woman and are in love with a woman, then that must be love and there must be something there and you know, that’s your family. People attribute that and assume it’s real. But I think with gay couples there’s a mentality that yeah, you could find someone else or why go to the effort for this, there’s plenty of other people you could find. But it’s not true. When you love somebody, you love somebody.”
Cross says the challenges sometimes overwhelm his friends and colleagues.
“I think it’s just a combination of the whole thing,” he says. “Black, interracial, bi-national, gay — sometimes it’s just too much and people don’t know how to deal with it.”
Rehoboth Beach
Rehoboth’s Blue Moon is for sale but owners aim to keep it in gay-friendly hands
$4.5 million listing includes real estate; business sold separately
Gay gasps could be heard around the DMV earlier this week when a real estate listing for Rehoboth Beach’s iconic Blue Moon bar and restaurant hit social media.
Take a breath. The Moon is for sale but the longtime owners are not in a hurry and are committed to preserving its legacy as a gay-friendly space.
“We had no idea the interest this would create,” Tim Ragan, one of the owners, told the Blade this week. “I guess I was a little naive about that.”
Ragan explained that he and longtime partner Randy Haney are separating the real estate from the business. The two buildings associated with the sale are listed by Carrie Lingo at 35 Baltimore Ave., and include an apartment, the front restaurant (6,600 square feet with three floors and a basement), and a secondary building (roughly 1,800 square feet on two floors). They are listed for $4.5 million.
The bar and restaurant business is being sold separately; the price has not been publicly disclosed.
But Ragan, who has owned the Moon for 20 years, told the Blade nothing is imminent and that the Moon remains open through the holidays and is scheduled to reopen for the 2026 season on Feb. 10. He has already scheduled some 2026 entertainment.
“It’s time to look for the next people who can continue the history of the Moon and cultivate the next chapter,” Ragan said, noting that he turns 70 next year. “We’re not panicked; we separated the building from the business. Some buyers can’t afford both.”
He said there have been many inquiries and they’ve considered some offers but nothing is firm yet.
Given the Moon’s pioneering role in queering Rehoboth Beach since its debut 44 years ago in 1981, many LGBTQ visitors and residents are concerned about losing such an iconic queer space to redevelopment or chain ownership.
“That’s the No. 1 consideration,” Ragan said, “preserving a commitment to the gay community and honoring its history. The legacy needs to continue.” He added that they are not inclined to sell to one of the local restaurant chains.
You can view the real estate listing here.
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
Congratulations to Tristan Fitzpatrick on his new position as Digital Communications Manager with TerraPower. TerraPower creates technologies to provide safe, affordable, and abundant carbon-free energy. They devise ways to use heat and electricity to drive economic growth while decarbonizing industry.
Fitzpatrick’s most recent position was as Senior Communications Consultant with APCO in Washington, D.C. He led integrated communications campaigns at the fourth-largest public relations firm in the United States, increasing share of voice by 10 percent on average for clients in the climate, energy, health, manufacturing, and the technology. Prior to that he was a journalist and social media coordinator with Science Node in Bloomington, Ind.
Fitzpatrick earned his bachelor’s degree in journalism with a concentration in public relations, from Indiana University.
Congratulations also to the newly elected board of Q Street. Rob Curis, Abigail Harris, Yesenia Henninger, Stu Malec, and David Reid. Four of them reelected, and the new member is Harris.
Q Street is the nonprofit, nonpartisan, professional association of LGBTQ+ policy and political professionals, including lobbyists and public policy advocates. Founded in 2003 on the heels of the Supreme Court’s historic decision in Lawrence v. Texas, when there was renewed hope for advancing the rights of the LGBTQ community in Washington. Q Street was formed to be the bridge between LGBTQ advocacy organizations, LGBTQ lobbyists on K Street, and colleagues and allies on Capitol Hill.
District of Columbia
New queer bar Rush beset by troubles; liquor license suspended
Staff claim they haven’t been paid, turn to GoFundMe as holidays approach
The D.C. Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Board on Dec. 17 issued an order suspending the liquor license for the recently opened LGBTQ bar and nightclub Rush on grounds that it failed to pay a required annual licensing fee.
Rush held its grand opening on Dec. 5 on the second and third floors of a building at 2001 14 Street, N.W., with its entrance around the corner on U Street next to the existing LGBTQ dance club Bunker.
It describes itself on its website as offering “art-pop aesthetics, high-energy nights” in a space that “celebrates queer culture without holding back.” It includes a large dance floor and a lounge area with sofas and chairs.
Jackson Mosley, Rush’s principal owner, did not immediately respond to a phone message from the Washington Blade seeking his comment on the license suspension.
The ABC Board’s order states, “The basis for this Order is that a review of the Board’s official records by the Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Administration (ABCA) has determined that the Respondent’s renewal payment check was returned unpaid and alternative payment was not submitted.”
The three-page order adds, “Notwithstanding ABCA’s efforts to notify the Respondent of the renewal payment check return, the Respondent failed to pay the license fee for the period of 2025 to 2026 for its Retailer’s Class CT license. Therefore, the Respondent’s license has been SUSPENDED until the Respondent pays the license fees and the $50.00 per day fine imposed by the Board for late payment.”
ABCA spokesperson Mary McNamara told the Blade that the check from Rush that was returned without payment was for $12,687, which she said was based on Rush’s decision to pay the license fee for four years. She said that for Rush to get its liquor license reinstated it must now pay $3,819 for a one-year license fee plus a $100 bounced check fee, a $750 late fee, and $230 transfer fee, at a total of $4,919 due.
Under D.C. law, bars, restaurants and other businesses that normally serve alcoholic beverages can remain open without a city liquor license as long as they do not sell or serve alcohol.
But D.C. drag performer John Marsh, who performs under the name Cake Pop and who is among the Rush employees, said Rush did not open on Wednesday, Dec. 17, the day the liquor board order was issued. He said that when it first opened, Rush limited its operating days from Wednesday through Sunday and was not open Mondays and Tuesdays.
Marsh also said none of the Rush employees received what was to be their first monthly salary payment on Dec. 15. He said approximately 20 employees set up a GoFundMe fundraising site to raise money to help sustain them during the holiday period after assuming they will not be paid.
He said he doubted that any of the employees would return to work in the unlikely case that Mosley would attempt to reopen Rush without serving liquor or if he were to pay the licensing fee to allow him to resume serving alcohol without having received their salary payment.
As if all that were not enough, Mosley would be facing yet another less serious problem related to the Rush policy of not accepting cash payments from customers and only accepting credit card payments. A D.C. law that went into effect Jan. 1, 2025, prohibits retail businesses such as restaurants and bars from not accepting cash payments.
A spokesperson for the D.C. Department of Licensing and Consumer Protection, which is in charge of enforcing that law, couldn’t immediately be reached to determine what the penalty is for a violation of the law requiring that type of business to accept cash payments.
The employee GoFundMe site, which includes messages from several of the employees, can be accessed here.
Mosley on Thursday responded to the reports about his business with a statement on the Rush website.
He claims that employees were not paid because of a “tax-related mismatch between federal and District records” and that some performers were later paid. He offers a convoluted explanation as to why payroll wasn’t processed after the tax issue was resolved, claiming the bank issued paper checks.
“After contacting our payroll provider and bank, it was determined that electronic funds had been halted overnight,” according to the statement. “The only parties capable of doing so were the managers of the outside investment syndicate that agreed to handle our stabilization over the course of the initial three months in business.”
Mosley further said he has not left the D.C. area and denounced “rumors” spread by a former employee. He disputes the ABCA assertion that the Rush liquor license was suspended due to a “bounced check.” Mosley ends his post by insisting that Rush will reopen, though he did not provide a reopening date.
A Wider Bridge to close
‘Trump Rx’ plan includes sharp cuts to HIV drug prices
Rehoboth’s Blue Moon is for sale but owners aim to keep it in gay-friendly hands
Comings & Goings
Advocates say MTG bill threatens trans youth, families, and doctors
LGBTQ Democrats say they’re ready to fight to win in 2026
Brian Footer suspends campaign for Ward 1 D.C. Council seat
Far-right José Antonio Kast elected Chile’s next president
Lighting candles in a time of exhaustion
In real estate, trust the process
-
Politics3 days agoLGBTQ Democrats say they’re ready to fight to win in 2026
-
District of Columbia2 days ago
Brian Footer suspends campaign for Ward 1 D.C. Council seat
-
Chile5 days ago
Far-right José Antonio Kast elected Chile’s next president
-
Opinions3 days ago
Lighting candles in a time of exhaustion
