Local
Jackson petitions Supreme Court in D.C. marriage case
Local officials mum on filing opposition brief
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)
Rehoboth Beach
Officials raise troubling concerns about Rehoboth mayoral candidate Suzanne Goode
Homophobic emails, ‘aggressive’ behavior cited: ‘It just seems to be getting worse’
As Rehoboth Beach voters prepare to elect a new mayor on Aug. 8, some city officials and local residents are raising new concerns about the behavior of City Commissioner and mayoral candidate Suzanne Goode.
In addition to a history of troubling emails in which she has used homophobic language and criticized the city’s rainbow crosswalks, Goode is being accused of inappropriate behavior by a neighbor and a fellow Commissioner related to a dispute on the Nextdoor online platform.
The Blade spoke to City Manager Taylour Tedder, Commissioner Chris Galanty, and others about Goode’s behavior during her time as commissioner.
Goode was elected commissioner in August 2024. Fellow commissioner Susan Stewart, who is also running for mayor, criticized Goode’s behavior in a March 9, 2026 meeting, bringing up emails outlining Goode’s offensive conduct toward city staff.
In one email, Goode wrote to Rehoboth Beach City Solicitor Lisa Borin Ogden: “I am sorry that I learned from Google when you were first interviewed [in the] spring [of] 2025 that you are Jewish. My opinion of my fellow Jews declined significantly thanks to you since last summer. Actually would have thought you would have more compassion than the average person, based on your late brother. Except you don’t. I am sick of your haughty attitude toward me.”
In other emails, Goode questions why city officials encouraged CAMP Rehoboth and Clear Space Theatre to apply for grant funds. She has denigrated both institutions, referring to CAMP as a “questionable non-profit” and Clear Space as “second rate” with a “woke, drag queen bent” at times. She accuses Rehoboth’s LGBTQ community of displaying “their sex lives in public view” and fears physical violence from LGBTQ activists.
Goode disputed the claims and called for the city to remove Stewart’s remarks from the website.
The following statements were included in the emails sent by Goode:
• “Gays and theatre aficionados can donate as much as they like to these pet causes. Some taxpayers think the theatre is second-rate as community theatres go, and many dislike the RB emphasis on LGBTQ when heterosexuals don’t demand equivalent display of their sex lives in public view.”
• “Just because the LGBTQ community feels oppressed and discriminated against, that doesn’t mean that those who identify as LGBTQ are better able to recognize racial discrimination than someone like myself. It might surprise some of you to learn that I briefly dated an African American fellow college student.”
• “A performing arts and LGBTQ agenda isn’t appropriate for BOC spending when the city faces over $60M in debt.”
• “But there are some folks in town, who ironically have to remain in the closet (conservatives now have to do what gays had to do in the 20th century — ah, the irony) who object to the woke, drag queen bent of Clear Space at times. They have confided this in me, and thanked me for fighting for their tax dollars. Maybe I will regret speaking up, as some LGBTQ activist will attack me physically, even though I am a complete supporter of gay rights, and have as many gay male friends as female friends now that I live in RB with a large gay population.”
In the emails, Goode also referred to City Manager Tedder as “the mayor’s whore.”
Stewart told the Blade that the troubling behavior has since escalated.
Commissioner Chris Galanty spoke to the Blade about Goode’s behavior as commissioner and her issues with the rainbow crosswalks in town.
“Suzanne told me on two separate occasions that she didn’t like the rainbow crosswalks, and she said that she didn’t understand why they had to exist, and she didn’t understand why gay people had to advertise their sexuality, and she said straight people don’t have to do that.”
Galanty said that when he challenged her on this, she “moved very quickly to another topic.” He said that she has now shifted her perspective and is more concerned that the rainbow crosswalks are an issue of labor costs.
Goode told the Blade that, “Unfortunately, the rainbow crosswalks have potentially reduced the upkeep of the conventional crosswalks. But the rainbow crosswalks are attractive in and of themselves, and they do add to our recognition of Rehoboth’s longstanding status as a gay-friendly town.”
Accusations of “aggressive” behavior by Goode aren’t limited to emails. Last summer, Goode came to the home of Diana Jones, a property owner in Rehoboth Beach who is a neighbor of Galanty’s. Jones spoke to the Blade to share her experience with Goode.
Jones is active on Nextdoor, an online social network for neighborhoods. She said that she got involved on the platform during the time of the commissioners election last summer, in which her neighbor, Chris Galanty, was elected as commissioner.
Jones said that she made posts supporting Galanty. She said that someone posted a link of a lawsuit that involved Goode’s husband, Jeffrey Goode, who lost his race for commissioner last summer. Jones said that she reposted the link after it was taken down.
Jones said that the lawsuit was “very relevant to somebody who is running for city commissioner.”
Jones said that Suzanne Goode showed up at her house as a result of the post. Jones was out walking her dog nearby so Goode briefly spoke with Jones’s husband who was home.
“She came over to my house because she was saying I was doxing him,” said Jones. Jones said that Goode then found her as she was walking her dog and tried to talk to her about her Nextdoor posts, saying that she “brought up a very painful time in her life.”
Jones said that she has not had any communication with Goode since.
When asked for comment on the situation with Jones, Goode responded by saying “Diana Jones’s behavior toward me was despicable, and the way she has chosen to give her side of the story to news media says more about her than it will ever say about me.”
Galanty told the Blade that Goode came to his house in late June of this year when he was not home. She then called him about Jones.
“She relayed to me that she was having a disagreement with my neighbor on the Nextdoor platform, and she asked me to intercede with the neighbor,” said Galanty. “She said, ‘Please speak to her because I am frustrated with what she is saying. She needs to stop, and you need to say something to her.'”
Galanty said that Goode called him four times and texted him 32 times in the span of three and a half hours the next day.
Galanty said that he responded the next day, telling her that her behavior was inappropriate.
“Eventually it took a couple of weeks, but she apologized in her own way. She just said we just need to let it go.”
From his perspective as commissioner, Galanty said, “She likes to re-litigate things that have happened, six months ago, nine months ago. She likes to rehash issues that are in the past.”
“She can be really aggressive, and people are just really turned off by her,” said Galanty.
Tedder, who has accused Goode of creating a “hostile work environment,” told the Blade about his experiences working with Goode.
“She does not support the staff, and constantly tells us to resign,” said Tedder.
Tedder said that Goode texted City Solicitor Ogden at 7:45 a.m. on a Saturday, telling her to resign.
“Sometimes she does have good ideas. It’s just it gets so lost in these pages and pages of emails and thousands of emails that she sends,” said Tedder.
In regards to Goode’s behavior, Tedder said it has been going on since the beginning. “It just seems to be getting worse.”
Maryland
Advocates for trans students urge Md. to fight White House threats
Four school districts under federal investigation
By JESSICA CALEFATI | Allies of transgender children are urging state education officials to fight back against the Trump-Vance administration, which has threatened to punish a growing number of Maryland school districts over local policies that affirm students’ gender identities.
The advocates testified Tuesday morning before the Maryland State Board of Education — one day after the U.S. Education and Justice departments alleged that Anne Arundel County’s school system violated federal student privacy law by withholding a student’s gender identity from their parents. A spokesperson for the district said Monday legal counsel had not yet reviewed the claims and that the district had no further comment.
School districts in Prince George’s, Montgomery, and Frederick Counties were already under investigation for allegedly violating Title IX, the civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination. The federal government last month threatened to revoke funding from the districts because they allow trans students to use restrooms and locker rooms that align with their identities.
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Maryland
White House threatens Anne Arundel schools over gender identity policy
District faces possible legal action or loss of federal funding
By JESSICA CALEFATI | The Trump-Vance administration on Monday threatened to punish Anne Arundel County’s school system with legal action or the loss of federal funding for allegedly withholding information about a student’s gender identity and transition from the child’s parents.
The U.S. Education and Justice Departments together determined that the suburban Maryland district treats students’ gender identities as confidential medical information that cannot be shared with parents, in violation of federal student privacy law, according to a news release. A federal lawsuit filed against the district earlier this month made similar claims.
“As a mother and a grandmother, it is unconscionable that any school district would hide the most sensitive information about children in their care from their own parents,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement. “This is not only an affront to basic moral principles, but also to parents’ rights under federal law.”
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
PHOTOS: Petal Release Party
Madonna headlines World Pride Music Festival in Amsterdam
Reggie White relishing first season as artistic director of Woolly Mammoth
PHOTOS: Amsterdam Pride Canal Parade
Amsterdam Pride Canal Parade draws hundreds of thousands
Madonna to perform at World Pride in Amsterdam
BLADE ENDORSEMENT: Susan Stewart for mayor of Rehoboth Beach
PHOTOS: Lambda Legal in the Pines
Calendar: July 31-August 6
