Connect with us

National

Supreme Court asked to lift stay on ‘Don’t Ask’ injunction

Plaintiffs call appellate court’s order an ‘abuse of discretion’

Published

on

Plaintiffs in litigation challenging “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” on Friday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift a stay issued by an appellate court allowing continued enforcement of the military’s gay ban.

Lawyers representing Log Cabin Republicans, which filed the lawsuit against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 2004, requested that the high court vacate a stay issued by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The application argues continued enforcement of the law would harm gay, lesbian and bisexual service members.

“Unless the court of appeals’ stay is vacated, the respondents will be free to continue to investigate and discharge American servicemembers for no reason other than their homosexuality, in violation of their due process and First Amendment rights,” the application states.

The application was sent to U.S. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, who’s the circuit justice for the Ninth Circuit. The Log Cabin litigation is pending before the appellate court in that circuit.

In a statement, Dan Woods, partner at White & Case LLP, which is representing Log Cabin, emphasized that the stay is “arbitrary” and said the Supreme Court should vacate the order immediately.

“We continue to look forward to the day when all Americans can serve in our military without regard to their sexual orientation,” Woods said.

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, criticized the U.S. Justice Department for requesting the stay with the Ninth Circuit and said the action drove his organization to pursue the matter with the high court.

“It is unfortunate the Obama Justice Department has forced the Log Cabin Republicans to go to the Supreme Court,” Cooper said.

Late last month, the Ninth Circuit decided to stay an injunction preventing the enforcement of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” issued by U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips after he ruling striking down the law. The application filed by Log Cabin on Friday maintains that the decision to stay the injunction was an “abuse of discretion.”

Among other things, the application states that the stay order ignored controlling precedent, sidestepped the requirement that respondents show a likelihood of success and “gave no consideration whatsoever” to the injury that would befall applicants because of the stay.

“Any alleged harms to the government are entirely bureaucratic, procedural, and transitory in nature, and are sharply outweighed by the substantial constitutional injury that servicemembers will sustain from a stay of the district court’s judgment,” the application states.

Log Cabin lawyers argue that at a minimum, the Supreme Court should halt discharges of gay service members currently serving in the U.S. military as the Ninth Circuit hears the litigation. Such an order would be similar to what U.S. Appellate Judge William Fletcher, who serves on the Ninth Circuit, thought was appropriate in his dissenting opinion on the stay.

In a Q&A attached to his statement, Woods said how long the application review would take is up to the court and that justices may give the U.S. government an opportunity to respond.

Additionally, Woods said it’s up to Kennedy to determine whether the entire Supreme Court will be involved in the decision on vacating the order. Woods said Kennedy may decide for himself of refer the application to the entire Supreme Court.

If the high court vacates the stay, Woods said “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is dead for the time that the Ninth Circuit considers the lawsuit. But if the high court upholds the Ninth Circuit’s decision, Woods said plaintiffs would next move in the appellate court to expedite the litigation.

Download the application to vacate here.

UPDATE: Kennedy has directed the U.S. government to reply to Log Cabin’s request to vacate the stay by Wednesday at 5 pm, according to sources familiar with the lawsuit.

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