National
Congress nears key votes on ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal
Levin seeks to overturn law as part of Defense budget process

Former U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. David Hall was among an estimated 350 people who visited Capitol Hill this week to lobby for the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.' (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
As crucial votes loom on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the House and Senate, supporters of repeal are stepping up pressure on lawmakers to act this year.
During the week of May 24, the Senate Armed Services Committee is set to consider major defense budget legislation. Opponents of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are expecting Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) to introduce a measure to overturn the law as part of the consideration of the defense authorization bill.
At around the same time, the House version of the defense authorization bill is expected to come to the floor. Those favoring repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are anticipating that Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) will offer an amendment that would end the law.
Whether sufficient votes exist in the Senate committee or on the House floor for repeal is unclear. On April 30, Defense Secretary Robert Gates issued a letter advising Congress to hold off on any repeal vote. Most observers said the letter would have a chilling effect on repeal efforts.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said he’s “not very” confident that there will be enough votes for passage because he doesn’t believe those seeking to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are sufficiently lobbying lawmakers.
“If I felt that the community was lobbying the way it should be, I’d feel better, but everybody wants to be the armchair quarterback and not do the more boring work of calling up their representative,” Frank said. “I’m optimistic in general, but the key question is will people make the calls or not?”
To step up the pressure on Congress, a group of about 350 citizen lobbyists swarmed Capitol Hill on Tuesday to encourage lawmakers to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as part of a veterans lobby day sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign and Servicemembers United.
The event, which was the most highly attended lobby day in HRC’s history and the largest lobby event on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” followed a White House visit Monday in which LGBT veterans urged administration officials to move on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal legislation.
Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the lobby day events were “enormously successful” in part because of the sheer numbers.
Nicholson estimated that about 90 percent of those who participated in the event were veterans, a fact he said had an impact on lawmakers sensitive to the concerns of those who have served in the military.
“They were people who actually had credibility talking on the issue and people who could actually engage military legislative assistants eye-to-eye and issue-to-issue,” he said.
As a result of the lobby day and other efforts, Nicholson said he saw potential for Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Scott Brown (R-Mass.) to move toward supporting repeal after previously being on the fence.
Still, the outcome of the votes in the House and Senate remained unclear. Most repeal supporters said they were more likely to find success in the House than the Senate.
Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said he agreed with an assessment given to him by Murphy in the House that sufficient support exists for passage of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” on the floor.
Still, Sarvis said “we’re a couple votes short” of repeal succeeding in the Senate Armed Services Committee, although he noted that it’s still possible to win more support in the time remaining before the committee markup.
Sarvis said a key to winning more support would be finding “a legislative compromise” that addresses the concerns Gates raised about holding off on repeal until the Pentagon completes its study on the issue.
LGBT lobbyists have been pushing for delayed implementation legislation — a bill that Congress would pass now and would take effect in 2011.
On Monday, Levin said he wanted to pursue repeal as part of the defense authorization process — if the votes are present — and that he favors the idea of passing legislation that wouldn’t take effect until later, according to Roll Call.
“What we ought to do is repeal it, but make the effective date after the report,” Levin was quoted as saying.
Additionally, Sarvis said President Obama needs to follow through on his campaign promise to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and convince senators to move forward on the issue.
“The person that we need to hear from the most in these closing days is the president of the United States,” Sarvis said. “The president is in the best position to reconcile the concerns that Secretary Gates expressed with the desire of Chairman Levin and others in the next two weeks.”
Nicholson similarly said he believes repeal would pass in the House and that in the Senate Armed Services Committee a vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would be close. He also supported forcing a vote among Senate Armed Services Committee members even if the votes are lacking for repeal.
“I think we’re starting to consider the idea that if you called the bluff of those who say they’re leaning ‘no,’ that they may change their mind,” Nicholson said. “We’re talking about one or two votes. Calling their bluff and doing the vote anyway and proceeding to the outcome is potentially a legitimate tactic, now, too.”
It’s possible that the House version of the defense authorization bill would contain repeal language that the Senate bill lacks, meaning a conference committee would resolve the issue. Whatever the conference committee decides would be the final legislation that makes its way to Obama’s desk.
Asked about whether repeal could succeed this year if only the House votes in favor of ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Frank said supporters “ought to focus on trying to lobby members.”
“It bothers me that you and your readers and others are worrying about what they can’t affect in lieu of doing things that they can affect by calling members and lobbying,” he said.
Sarvis said “there’s no way of knowing” whether repeal is still possible through the conference committee if the House acts on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Senate is unable to pass repeal.
“If the House votes for full repeal and the Senate doesn’t, yes, the issue is alive and will be within the scope of the conference, but it will be far, far more difficult to keep in there,” Sarvis said.
Sarvis said “it’s urgent” that both the House and Senate act to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as part of the defense authorization bills because that would provide repeal supporters the best conditions heading into conference committee.
Nicholson said “it’s not as likely” for repeal to succeed if one chamber of Congress votes in favor of it and another chamber doesn’t, but said such a situation would nonetheless provide a path to overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“People may be disappointed and pessimistic if it comes down to the conference committee and fighting it out there,” he said. “But Congressman Murphy and Sen. Levin are 100 percent committed to seeing action on repeal this year, and are going to fight for it even if it comes down to conference committee.”
California
DOJ launches investigation into Calif. trans student-athlete policy
State AG vows to defend Golden State laws

One day after President Donald Trump threatened to strip California of “large scale federal funding” over its policy on transgender student-athletes, his Justice Department announced it is investigating the state for potentially violating Title IX.
“The investigation is to determine whether California, its senior legal, educational, and athletic organizations, and the school district are engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination on the basis of sex,” the DOJ said in a statement.
The DOJ said it notified State Attorney General Rob Bonta, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, the Jurupa Unified School District, and the California Interscholastic Federation of its investigation.
AB Hernandez, 16, is an out trans female student-athlete at Jurupa Valley High School who qualified for this weekend’s state track and field championship. As the Washington Blade reported earlier this week, the CIF announced a change in the rules at the finals to accommodate girls who were displaced by Hernandez, including giving medals to cisgender competitors who earn a podium spot should Hernandez place ahead of them.
“We remain committed to defending and upholding California laws and all additional laws which ensure the rights of students, including transgender students, to be free from discrimination and harassment,” said Bonta in a statement. “We will continue to closely monitor the Trump administration’s actions in this space.”
As KTLA reported, California is one of 22 states that allow trans student-athletes to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity. Former Gov. Jerry Brown signed that policy into law in 2013.
The DOJ announced it is also now supporting a federal lawsuit targeting Bonta and the state Department of Education, claiming that California law and CIF policy discriminate against cisgender girls by allowing trans female athletes to compete according to their gender identity.
The lawsuit was filed by a conservative law group, Advocates for Faith and Freedom, representing the families of two girls at Martin Luther King High School in Riverside. Their suit claims the school’s cross-country team dropped one athlete from her varsity spot in favor of a trans athlete and that school administrators compared their “Save Girls Sports” T-shirts to swastikas.
Officials in Washington also weighed-in, referring to trans girls and women as “males.”
“Title IX exists to protect women and girls in education,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet K. Dhillon. “It is perverse to allow males to compete against girls, invade their private spaces, and take their trophies.”
“The law is clear: Discrimination on the basis of sex is illegal and immoral,” said U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli. “My office and the rest of the Department of Justice will work tirelessly to protect girls’ sports and stop anyone — public officials included — from violating women’s civil rights.”
According to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office, out of the 5.8 million students in California’s K-12 public school system, the number of active trans student-athletes is estimated to be in the single digits.
U.S. Federal Courts
Immigration judge dismisses Andry Hernández Romero’s asylum case
Gay makeup artist from Venezuela ‘forcibly removed’ to El Salvador in March

An immigration judge on Tuesday dismissed the asylum case of a gay makeup artist from Venezuela who the U.S. “forcibly removed” to El Salvador.
The Immigrant Defenders Law Center represents Andry Hernández Romero.
The Los Angeles-based organization in a press release notes Immigration Judge Paula Dixon in San Diego granted the Department of Homeland Security’s motion to dismiss Hernández’s case. A hearing had been scheduled to take place on Wednesday.
Hernández asked for asylum because of persecution he said he suffered in Venezuela because of his sexual orientation and political beliefs. NBC News reported Hernández pursued his case while at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego.
The Trump-Vance administration in March “forcibly removed” Hernández and other Venezuelans from the U.S. and sent them to El Salvador.
The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”
President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” Hernández is one of the lead plaintiffs in a lawsuit that seeks to force the U.S. to return those sent to El Salvador under the 18th century law.
The Immigrant Defenders Law Center says officials with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection claimed Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member because of his tattoos. Hernández and hundreds of other Venezuelans who the Trump-Vance administration “forcibly removed” from the U.S. remain at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem earlier this month told gay U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing that Hernández “is in El Salvador” and questions about his well-being “would be best made to the president and to the government of El Salvador.” Garcia, along with U.S. Reps. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.), Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.), and Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), were unable to meet with Hernández last month when they traveled to the Central American country.
“DHS is doing everything it can to erase the fact that Andry came to the United States seeking asylum and he was denied due process as required by our Constitution,” said Immigrant Defenders Law Center President Lindsay Toczylowski on Thursday in the press release her organization released. “We should all be incredibly alarmed at what has happened in Andry’s case. The idea that the government can disappear you because of your tattoos, and never even give you a day in court, should send a chill down the spine of every American. If this can happen to Andry, it can happen to any one of us.”
Toczylowski said the Immigrant Defenders Law Center will appeal Dixon’s decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which the Justice Department oversees.
The Immigrant Defenders Law Center, the Human Rights Campaign, and other groups on June 6 plan to hold a rally for Hernández outside the U.S. Supreme Court. Protesters in Venezuela have also called for his release.
“Having tattoos does not make you a delinquent,” reads one of the banners that protesters held.
California
Calif. governor ‘encouraged’ by new state guidelines for trans student-athletes
Gavin Newsom responded to California Interscholastic Federation announcement

Governor Gavin Newsom is “encouraged” by a new policy announced Tuesday by the California Interscholastic Federation which critics say basically erases the concept that finishing first matters.
The CIF’s “pilot entry process” will give high school girls who lost to a transgender student-athlete at last weekend’s qualifying meet an invitation to compete at the state championship next weekend.
At the conclusion of the CIF Section’s Track and Field qualifying meets this past weekend, the CIF made the decision to pilot an entry process for the upcoming 2025 CIF State Track and Field Championships. Please see the following statement: pic.twitter.com/qOjWl6eybR
— CIF State (@CIFState) May 27, 2025
“CIF’s proposed pilot is a reasonable, respectful way to navigate a complex issue without compromising competitive fairness,” said Newsom spokesperson Izzy Gardon in a statement. “The governor is encouraged by this thoughtful approach.”
The change came hours after President Donald Trump threatened to pull “large scale federal funding” from the state if officials allowed trans athletes to compete according to their gender identity.
The CIF statement did not address Trump’s comments or whether the pilot entry process was in response to his social media post.
KCRA quoted a source as saying the policy had been in the works for weeks. The station also reported judges will score trans athletes separately from cisgender competitors, so there will ultimately be three winners: a cisgender male winner, a cisgender female winner, and a trans student-athlete winner.
“The CIF believes this pilot entry process achieves the participation opportunities we seek to afford our student-athletes,” the statement by CIF said.
CIF did not clarify if this pilot entry process will continue beyond this year’s championship, or how judges will determine whether an athlete is trans. A spokesperson for CIF did not immediately respond to these questions by the news media.
The trans athlete in question, AB Hernandez, 16, qualified to advance to the May 30-31 finals in Clovis, Calif., by winning regional competitions in long jump and triple jump on May 15. Now, she also will be competing against those same cisgender student-athletes she already beat.
In an interview with the California news outlet Capital & Main earlier this month, Hernandez refuted claims that she has an unfair advantage because she was presumed to be male at birth. She finished eighth in the high jump and third in the long jump at a recent meet.
“All I thought was, I don’t think you understand that this puts your idiotic claims to trash,” Hernandez told the paper. Of her critics, who booed so loudly at a recent meet they caused a false start at one event, Hernandez said, she said she pays them no mind.
“There’s nothing I can do about people’s actions, just focus on my own,” Hernandez told Capital & Main. “I’m still a child, you’re an adult, and for you to act like a child shows how you are as a person.”
The paper reported two of her most stringent opponents confronted the teen’s mother at a recent meet. “What a coward of a woman you are, allowing that,” said local superintendent candidate Sonja Shaw to Nereyda Hernandez. “How embarrassing!”
Shaw was at a meet with Jessica Tapia, an ex-gym teacher who was fired by Hernandez’s high school for refusing to respect trans and nonbinary students’ pronouns. They are part of the Save Girls Sports association that opposes inclusion of transgender female students in girls’ and women’s sports.
As of press time, Trump has not responded on social media to CIF’s announcement.
Podcaster and anti-trans inclusion activist Riley Gaines, a former college swimmer who tied for fifth place with a trans athlete in a 2022 national championship meet, denounced the CIF’s new policy, claiming “boys would still be competing against girls.”
This is not an adequate response from @CIFSS following Trump's threat to pull funds from CA. Boys would still be competing against girls.
They're fully admitting girls are being pushed out of their sports by boys. They just think the boys feelings matter more. pic.twitter.com/HQ5HD4QWZl
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) May 27, 2025
For his part, Newsom has already gone on the record against trans female athletes participating in girls’ and women’s sports, calling it an “issue of fairness.” That statement drew the ire of advocacy organizations, including Human Rights Campaign. Although Trump said he planned to speak to the governor, Newsom’s office did not say whether Newsom and the president had spoken.
As Politico reported, Republican lawmakers across California denounced the CIF’s new policy, some claiming it did not go far enough to “safeguard the interests of all female athletes.”
A spokesperson for the Jurupa Unified School District, where the trans student attends school, noted that the athlete is competing fairly and in accordance with the law.
“Both state law and CIF policy currently require that students be permitted to participate in athletic teams and competitions consistent with their gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the pupil’s records,” said spokesperson Jacquie Paul.
“We remain committed to following the law as written and ensuring that all students are granted the rights afforded to them in a safe and welcoming environment.”
-
Arts & Entertainment1 day ago
Shakira cancels WorldPride concert
-
District of Columbia4 days ago
WorldPride hotel bookings hint at disappointing turnout
-
World Pride 20254 days ago
Kristine W on WorldPride, drag queens, and being ‘Love Personified’
-
Movies3 days ago
‘Pee-wee’ spills the tea in outstanding new documentary