Connect with us

Local

Jackson petitions Supreme Court in D.C. marriage case

Local officials mum on filing opposition brief

Published

on

Attorneys for Bishop Harry Jackson, the minister who has led efforts to kill D.C.’s same-sex marriage law, filed a petition last week asking the U.S. Supreme to weigh in on whether the city should allow voters to decide whether to overturn the law.

In a filing known as a petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Jackson’s attorneys asked the high court to allow Jackson and six others to appeal a decision earlier this year by the D.C. Court of Appeals rejecting their lawsuit seeking to force the city to hold a ballot measure on the marriage law.

D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles, who has been praised for his strongly worded briefs defending the same-sex marriage law in court, has yet to say whether the city will file a brief opposing Jackson’s Supreme Court petition.

City officials, including presumptive Mayor-elect Vincent Gray, have said they remain strongly supportive of the same-sex marriage law and would martial all the needed resources to defend it if the Supreme Court agrees to take Jackson’s case.

Supreme Court rules say briefs opposing a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari are not mandatory. One gay rights attorney said opposing parties often don’t file opposition briefs if they believe the high court is unlikely to approve a certiorari petition.

“I would think Peter Nickles might still write something,” said gay rights attorney Mark Levine. “But he may choose not to.”

Spokespersons for Nickles and the mayor’s office did immediately respond to calls asking if the city plans to file an opposition brief on the case.

The city has 30 days to file an opposing brief.

Four of the nine Supreme Court justices are needed to approve a petition for certiorari, which allows a case to come before the court for consideration on its merits. The court turns down the overwhelming majority of cases that come before it through petitions of certiorari, according to information posted on the court’s website.

Should the court agree to take the case, five of the nine justices are needed to issue a ruling in Jackson’s favor by overturning the appeals court decision.

Levine said it’s unlikely that the Supreme Court would agree to take the case, although he said its past rulings on some controversial cases have surprised legal observers.

The D.C. Court of Appeals ruled earlier this year that the city’s Board of Elections and Ethics was correct in disqualifying Jackson’s proposed ballot measure seeking to overturn the same-sex marriage law. The election board cited a city law governing voter initiatives and referenda that it said prohibits the city from holding such a ballot measure because, if approved, it would violate the D.C. Human Rights Act’s ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Jackson and his attorneys argue that the law restricting ballot measures that go against provisions in the D.C. Human Rights Act is invalid because it violates the city’s Home Rule Charter, which Congress passed in the early 1970s.

The election board and a D.C. Superior Court judge rejected that claim as did the Court of Appeals. Each said the ballot measure restriction doesn’t violate the Home Rule Charter.

In March, before the appeals court issued its decision on the case, Jackson’s lawyers filed an emergency motion asking the Supreme Court to issue a stay preventing the same-sex marriage law from taking effect until the appeals court ruled on the matter.

Chief Justice John Roberts denied the request for a stay, saying Jackson and others opposed to the marriage law could not show that they could win the case on its merits, or that allowing the law to take effect would cause them irreparable harm at that time.

However, Roberts said in his three-page ruling that Jackson’s argument that the city acted improperly by denying a request for a ballot measure on grounds that it would violate the Human Rights Act “has some force.”

That comment by Roberts has led to speculation by legal experts that the Chief Justice might give at least some consideration to supporting a petition that the Supreme Court take the case, even though the court has a longstanding history of deferring to lower courts on matters that don’t relate to the U.S. constitution or to federal law.

In a comment that same-sex marriage supporters viewed as a hopeful sign, Roberts also stated in his ruling in March that Congress had full authority to prevent the city from adopting its law prohibiting ballot measures that violate the Human Rights Act, but Congress chose not to do so.

Nickles, who wrote the city’s briefs defending the same-sex marriage law against Jackson’s lawsuit, has argued that the law barring ballot measure that violate the Human Rights Act was adopted in full compliance with the Home Rule Charter. He noted that Congress’s decision not to overturn either the ballot measure law or the same-sex marriage law shows there is no federal or constitutional interest in either law and Jackson has no grounds for asking the courts to overturn it.

The Supreme Court is not expected to announce its decision on whether or not to take Jackson’s case until sometime next year.

In addition to Jackson, the individuals that signed on to the petition seeking Supreme Court intervention in the case include Ward 5 ANC Commissioner Robert King, local minister Anthony Evans, former D.C. congressional delegate Walter Fauntroy, Dale Wafer, Melvin Dupree, and Howard Butler.

The group is being represented by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative religious-oriented litigation group that has challenged same-sex marriages laws in other states.

“Today’s petition by Bishop Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court is nothing more than a last-ditch attempt by outside interests to try to eliminate marriage equality in the District,” said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, in a statement last week. “Every court that has reviewed this case, including two D.C. Superior Court judges and the full Court of Appeals, has found Jackson’s arguments to be without merit,” he said. “The Council and mayor, representing District residents, overwhelmingly approved legislation providing for marriage equality. And we will remain vigilant against any efforts to take it away.”

(Jackson photo is a Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Maryland

Md. Commission on LGBTQIA+ Affairs released updated student recommendations

LGBTQ students report higher rates of bullying, suicide

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Ernesto Valle)

The Maryland Commission on LGBTQIA+ Affairs has released updated recommendations on how the state’s schools can support LGBTQ students.

The updated 16-page document outlines eight “actionable recommendations” for Maryland schools, supplemented with data and links to additional resources. The recommendations are: 

  • Developing and passing a uniform statewide and comprehensive policy aimed at protecting “transgender, nonbinary, and gender expansive students” against discrimination. The recommendation lists minimum requirements for the policy to address: name, pronoun usage, and restroom access.
  • Requiring all educators to receive training about the specific needs of LGBTQ students, by trained facilitators. The training’s “core competencies” include instruction on terminology, data, and support for students.
  • Implementing LGBTQ-inclusive curricula and preventing book bans. The report highlights a “comprehensive sexual education curriculum” as specifically important in the overall education curriculum. It also states the curriculum will “provide all students with life-saving information about how to protect themselves and others in sexual and romantic situations.” 
  • Establishing Gender Sexuality Alliances “at all schools and in all grade levels.” This recommendation includes measures on how to adequately establish effective GSAs, such as campaign advertising, and official state resources that outline how to establish and maintain a GSA. 
  • Providing resources to students’ family members and supporters. This recommendation proposes partnering with local education agencies to provide “culturally responsive, LGBTQIA+ affirming family engagement initiatives.” 
  • Collecting statewide data on LGBTQ youth. The data on Maryland’s LGBTQ youth population is sparse and non-exhaustive, and this recommendation seeks to collect information to inform policy and programming across the state for LGBTQ youth. 
  • Hiring a full-time team at the Maryland Department of Education that focuses on LGBTQ student achievement. These employees would have specific duties that include “advising on local and state, and federal policy” as well as developing the LGBTQ curriculum, and organizing the data and family resources. 
  • Promoting and ensuring awareness of the 2024 guidelines to support LGBTQ students. 

The commission has 21 members, with elections every year, and open volunteer positions. It was created in 2021 and amended in 2023 to add more members.

The Governor’s Office of Communication says the commission’s goal is “to serve LGBTQIA+ Marylanders by galvanizing community voices, researching and addressing challenges, and advocating for policies to advance equity and inclusion.” 

The commission is tasked with coming up with yearly recommendations. This year’s aim “to ensure that every child can learn in a safe, inclusive, and supportive environment.” 

The Human Rights Campaign’s most recent report on LGBTQ youth revealed that 46.1 percent of LGBTQ youth felt unsafe in some school settings. Those numbers are higher for transgender students, with 54.9 percent of them saying they feel unsafe in school. 

Maryland’s High School Youth Risk Behavior Survey reveals a disparity in mental health issues and concerns among students who identify as LGBTQ, compared to those who are heterosexual. LGBTQ students report higher rates of bullying, feelings of hopelessness, and suicidal thoughts. Nearly 36 percent of LGBTQ students report they have a suicide plan, and 26.7 percent of respondents say they have attempted to die by suicide. 

The commission’s recommendations seek to combat the mental health crisis among the state’s LGBTQ students. They are also a call for local and state governments to work towards implementing them. 

Continue Reading

Virginia

Va. lawmakers consider partial restoration of Ryan White funds

State Department of Health in 2025 cut $20 million from Part B program

Published

on

Virginia Capitol (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

​​The Virginia General Assembly is considering the partial restoration of HIV funding that the state’s Department of Health cut last year.

The Department of Health in 2025 cut $20 million — or 67 percent of total funding — from the Ryan White Part B program. 

The funding cuts started with the Trump-Vance administration passing budget cuts to federal HIV screening and protection programs. Rebate issues between the Virginia Department of Health and the company that provides HIV medications began.

Advocates say the funding cuts have disproportionately impacted lower-income people.

The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, a federal program started in 1990, provides medical services, public education, and essential services. Part B offers 21 services, seven of which remained funded after the budget cuts. 

Equality Virginia notes “in 2025, a 67 percent reduction severely destabilized HIV services across the commonwealth.” 

Virginia lawmakers have approved two bills — House Bill 30 and Senate Bill 30 — that would partially restore the funding. The Ryan White cuts remain a concern among community members. 

Both chambers of the General Assembly must review their proposed changes before lawmakers can adopt the bills.

“While these amendments aren’t a full restoration of what community-based organizations lost, this marks a critical step toward stabilizing care for thousands of Virginians living with HIV,” said Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman. “Equality Virginia plans to continue their contact with lawmakers and delegates through the conference and up until the passing of the budget.” 

“We appreciate lawmakers from both sides of the aisle who recognized the urgency of this moment and will work to ensure funding remains in the final version signed by the governor,” added Rahaman.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. Black Pride theme, performers announced at ‘Speakeasy’

Durand Bernarr to headline 2026 programming

Published

on

Center for Black Equity President and CEO Kenya Hutton announces 'New Black Renaissance' as the theme for 2026 DC Black Pride. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Center for Black Equity held its 2026 DC Black Pride Theme Reveal event at Union Stage on Monday. The evening, a “Speakeasy Happy Hour,” was hosted by Anthony Oakes and featured performances by Lolita Leopard and Keith Angelo. The Center for Black Equity organizes DC Black Pride.

Kenya Hutton, Center for Black Equity president and CEO, spoke following the performances by Leopard and Angelo. Hutton announced this year’s theme for DC Black Pride: “New Black Renaissance.”

Performers for 2026 DC Black Pride were announced to be Bang Garcon, Be Steadwell, Jay Columbus, Bennu Byrd, Rue Pratt and Akeem Woods.

Singer-songwriter Durand Bernarr was announced as the headliner for the 2026 festivities. Bernerr gave brief remarks through a video played on the screen at the stage.

DC Black Pride is scheduled for May 22-25. For more information on DC Black Pride, visit dcblackpride.org.

Continue Reading

Popular