National
Democrats find 2010 a tougher sell than 2008
LGBT bloggers wage ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Give’ campaign

Democratic National Committee Executive Director Jennifer O’Malley Dillon acknowledged that for LGBT voters, the ‘pace of change isn’t always fast enough.’ (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Asking gay Americans to reignite their enthusiasm for the Democratic Party at the same time critics are assailing the party for its handling of federal LGBT legislation is no small challenge.
But that’s exactly what Democratic National Committee Executive Director Jennifer O’Malley Dillon did last week while speaking at the National Stonewall Democrats biennial convention in D.C.
With three months remaining before the midterm elections, Dillon acknowledged that “an enthusiasm gap” exists between how Democratic voters feel this year compared to 2008. And she said that gap must close.
“We are going to hold the House and the Senate,” she said. “I’m very confident about that. But to do that, it’s just going to be incredibly hard. History is against us in this election.”
Also against Dillon’s efforts to rally LGBT voters are increasingly intense criticisms that President Obama and congressional leaders aren’t doing enough to enact promised changes, such as repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
Dillon recognized that the “pace of change isn’t always fast enough” for LGBT people, but said the DNC is creating new and more substantive ways to engage potential donors and volunteers.
“We want to make sure that the programs we’re building on moving forward aren’t just programs that we’re sitting in D.C. saying, ‘Oh, I think it would be great if we had ruffly stickers with rainbows on them,’ but that we are really building out a substantive program,” she said.
Dillon also said the DNC is developing communications — including material for the DNC website as part of the Your Voice Matters effort — to demonstrate in a clearer way the Obama administration’s broader accomplishments.
But discontent among many LGBT voters persists. And a continuing effort LGBT bloggers launched last year, called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Give,” urges LGBT people to withhold donations from the Democratic Party until more pro-LGBT bills are passed.
Leading the DNC boycott is John Aravosis, editor of Americablog.com, who’s asking readers to sign a pledge saying they will only contribute money to the Democratic Party after President Obama signs ENDA into law, and signs repeals of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act.
Aravosis said at the start of this year that he didn’t feel inclined to whip the effort because signs had emerged that Congress would pass “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and ENDA. The situation changed, though, as the year progressed.
“ENDA is now nowhere to be seen and no one thinks it’s passing both houses by the election — even though we were promised,” he said. “On ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ the legislation being discussed isn’t full repeal. It isn’t the repeal at all, even though it’s being sold that way. It’s not even clear if the legislation is going to pass anyway at this point.”
Aravosis dismissed the notion that outreach from the Democratic National Committee could be any substitute for the advancement of these issues.
“It’s a very 1990s strategy from the DNC,” he said. “They think showing face to the gay community — simply showing up at our events is going to buy our voters and buy our money because we should be so honored that they would deign to visit us.”
Aravosis estimated about 10,000 readers of Americablog.com have pledged to withhold donations to the Democratic Party as part of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Give” initiative.
“‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Give’ was, I think, part of a larger effort of the gay Netroots and, I would say, the community in general showing their ire at the Democrats,” Aravosis said. “I think it did change things for a while, but I think now the Democrats have backed off yet again.”
Dillon told the Blade that she hopes the DNC’s engagement with LGBT people will convince those who haven’t been satisfied to maintain their support.
“Of course, we’d like to see everyone feel like they can contribute to the party and feel good about that,” she said. “We obviously hope that people see us as a party that’s growing and building our commitment and our connection to the LGBT community, and that this is a place where people feel like their money will be well spent.”
‘We’re going to have disappointments’
Despite some disappointment, many LGBT Democrats who attended the Stonewall convention said they remain committed to the Democratic Party.
Rick Stafford, a veteran gay activist from Minnesota and chair of the Democratic Party’s LGBT caucus, said the Democratic Party is worth supporting because of the dramatic strides it’s taken in support of LGBT rights during the last decades.
“I can remember not more than 25 years ago, the Democratic Party and their leadership officials basically said to the LGBT community, ‘Go away,’” Stafford said. “We were held up as the poster child for the special interests. And in 25 years, if you told me back then that the issue that we would be fighting on disappointment was marriage equality, I would have told you [that] you were nuts.”
Stafford said LGBT critics of the Democratic Party should take care with the tone of their discussion because disagreement and discontent among Democrats led to the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994.
“We’re going to have disappointments, and not all Democratic elected officials are going to be supportive,” Stafford said. “But I think the leadership of Obama, Pelosi and even Harry Reid will be light years [ahead of] seeing Sarah Palin, Mitch McConnell or John Boehner setting the agenda for our country.”
Jerame Davis, who’s gay and co-owner of the Indiana-based LGBT website Bilerico Project, also expressed discontent about the amount of progress the party has made recently on LGBT issues.
“The one thing that has concerned me has been President Obama said he was going to be a ‘fierce advocate’ for our issues, and I’ve had trouble seeing where the advocacy was coming along, let alone the fierceness,” Davis said.
Still, Davis said the alternative to Democrats running the legislative branch of the federal government would be “far, far worse.”
“The idea of turning either of those [chambers] over to the Republicans scares me far worse than trying to continue to push our friends to be more supportive and to advocate harder for our issues,” Davis said.
Also urging continued support for Democrats was Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), a gay lawmaker who spoke at the convention. He told the Blade that people who were in doubt over supporting the Democratic Party should look closely at Democratic candidates and their Republican opponents.
“The Democratic Party is the only party that stands for equality,” he said. “I think it’s important that voters weigh where both candidates are on issues like marriage equality, ENDA — and 99 times out of 100, you’ll come out in favor of the Democrat.”
Polis has been active in raising funds not only for his own his re-election, but for other Democratic candidates. He’s set up two joint fundraising committees — the Jared Polis Majority Fund and the Jared Polis Victory Fund — that have raised substantial funds for Democrats seeking election.
The Jared Polis Majority Fund has raised $26,000 over the course of this Congress, while the Jared Polis Victory Fund has raised $150,000, according to Federal Election Commission reports.
Notable donations from the Jared Polis Majority Fund in the second quarter of this year included $1,500 to David Cicilline, the gay mayor of Providence, R.I. who’s running for Congress, and $1,500 to Rep. Scott Murphy (D-N.Y.), who last year replaced Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) upon her appointment to the U.S. Senate. The Jared Polis Victory Fund in the second quarter donated $4,000 to Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who’s seeking to retain his U.S. Senate seat.
“We’ve been very active in helping to build a pro-equality majority in the House and I’ve focused a lot of national fundraising in helping to achieve that,” Polis said.
The notion that LGBT voters should directly support candidates they see as supportive versus supporting the Democratic Party infrastructure is a common view among many advocates.
Aravosis said the best donation tactic that LGBT people can use as the November election approaches is to support candidates “who are proven to be pro-gay and proven to have come through for us.”
“That means support Democrats who actually have fought for us, or, [get behind] those Republicans who have fought for us, although I’m not convinced there’s too many,” he said.
Davis said this approach is the best way to ensure that a majority in Congress supportive of LGBT rights is in place.
“So, the way I see it is this: find a good friend that you think is going to advocate for our issues well, and that’s where you should put your money,” Davis said.
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.