Connect with us

National

Doubts persist as today’s ‘Don’t Ask’ cloture vote approaches

Activists fear 60-vote threshold may not be reached

Published

on

Supporters of open service in the U.S. military are expressing uncertainty — and even doubt — over today’s vote to move forward in the U.S. Senate with major defense legislation containing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, is among those saying he doesn’t think there are sufficient votes to move forward with the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill and the repeal language in the legislation.

Asked whether he sees success for the cloture vote, set for today at 2:15, Nicholson replied, “As it stands right now, no.”

“I haven’t seen anybody budge,” Nicholson said. “The Republican caucus is standing united and it’s still just a standoff.”

Blame is already being assigned to the White House.

Trevor Thomas, spokesperson for Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said his organization hasn’t seen an effort from the White House on the issue in recent days.

“We have not seen any signs that the White House has been whipping this vote in the last 48 hours,” Thomas said.

Thomas said he can’t predict what will happen with the cloture vote and maintained SLDN is “taking nothing for granted.”

Still, he said the vote will be “very tight” and repeal supporters need to call their senators to seek their support.

Provided all 59 Democrats vote in favor of moving forward with the defense legislation, at least one Republican vote is necessary to reach the 60-vote threshold to end the filibuster on the legislation.

However, GOP leaders are reportedly telling its caucus to vote against cloture because of limitations on amendments that Democratic leadership will allow on the floor.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said three amendments would be allowed on the defense authorization bill: a measure stripping the legislation of its “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal language; a measure attaching the DREAM Act, an immigration-related bill, to the legislation; and a measure addressing the “secret holds” senators can place on presidential nominees.

“Sen. Reid, if he has not, absolutely needs to be on the phone with Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, other members that we’ve discussed — and also be sitting down with them,” Thomas said.

On Monday, two key Republican senators issued statements indicating a lack of support for moving forward with the defense authorization bill, without outright saying they would vote against cloture.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) said the Senate should “have the ability to debate more than the three amendments the majority leader is allowing” and noted that the defense authorization bill “is the largest discretionary authorization measure that Congress considers.”

“It is therefore imperative that Senate deliberations on the defense bill be conducted without limitations and in a manner that allows for the consideration of all related amendments that senators may wish to offer,” she said.

An original co-sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act who’s known for supporting LGBT rights, Snowe also expressed concern about the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal language in the legislation and said a Pentagon report due Dec. 1 would help guide the decision to repeal the 1993 statute.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said in a separate statement on Monday that the Democratic leadership’s decision to limit amendments on the defense authorization bill is “disappointing.”

“It is disappointing, however, that instead of allowing a full and open debate on the defense authorization bill, the majority leader intends to shut Republicans out of the debate,” she said.  “Republicans and Democrats should have an equal opportunity to offer relevant amendments to this critical legislation.”

Collins called on Democratic leadership to “work with Republican leaders to negotiate an agreement so that the Senate can debate the defense bill this week.”

Other senators who are seen as potentially breaking with the Republican filibuster on the defense authorization bill are Sens. George Voinovoich (R-Ohio), Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). Their offices haven’t responded to the Blade’s request for comment on the legislation.

Earlier on Tuesday, SLDN added Sens. George LeMieux (R-Fla.) and Kit Bond (R-Mo.) as Republicans who might break with their party to vote for cloture on the defense authorization bill.

The standoff over the number of amendments that will be allowed on the defense authorization bill has become a partisan issue even among LGBT groups.

On Monday, R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, issued a statement criticizing Reid over the rules he’s set for the defense authorization bill.

“There is an overwhelming majority of senators, Democrats and Republicans, who are committed to repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ but Senator Reid’s partisan tactics could prevent the Senate from moving forward with this critical legislation for our nation’s military,” Cooper said.

Cooper added that the potentially “historic achievement” of the legislation shouldn’t “be scuttled because the Democratic majority has decided to exclude Republicans from the legislative process.”

But Michael Mitchell, executive director of National Stonewall Democrats, responded in a statement on Monday by saying Republicans are the ones obstructing the process.

“I hope that the Log Cabin Republicans will stop trying to blame those who are working through the legislative process to finally repeal [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] once and for all and instead work to change the votes of their party’s senators and have it pass with the bipartisan support they claim they have,” Mitchell said.

Noting that Reid has said on the Senate floor he’s willing to work with Republicans on the legislation, Mitchell said a failure to invoke cloture wouldn’t be “the Democrats’ fault and it certainly won’t be the fault of Sen. Harry Reid.”

(Troops photo courtesy of the Department of Defense)

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports

27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.

In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”

In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.

The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.

“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.

He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”

“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”

Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”

Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House

University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

Published

on

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Screen capture: C-SPAN)

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”

The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.

“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”

Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”

Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”

“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”

Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.

Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.

The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.

Continue Reading

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

Popular