National
Time running short for ending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Activists pressure Senators to end ban during lame duck session
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs rankled LGBT advocates after he failed to mention ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal when asked about legislative priorities in the lame duck session of Congress. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Supporters of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal are pushing the Senate to end the law in the lame duck session of Congress amid questions about whether sufficient support exists to complete the task by year’s end.
One Democratic aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told the Blade that Senate passage of major defense budget legislation to which “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal is attached would require “all the stars aligning” as well as active support from President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Asked this week whether those elements were coming into alignment as the lame duck session approaches, the aide said, “Hell no. We ain’t anywhere near alignment.”
Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told reporters on Tuesday that passing the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill with the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal language presents challenges.
“We’re trying to get both things accomplished, and we just don’t know if we can,” Levin said, according to the Grand Rapids Press.
“Republicans have filibustered the whole defense bill because of that [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] provision. There’s some people who say that unless the defense bill has that provision, that we shouldn’t pass it,” he continued. “My position is, we should try to get both things done some way or another.”
Media reports circulated this week that Levin was engaged in talks with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to advance the defense authorization bill after stripping it of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal language.
But while some see challenges in moving forward with legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” others see a path forward if certain conditions are met.
Winnie Stachelberg, senior vice president for external relations at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, said Tuesday in a conference call with reporters that advocates are in a “solid position” to see legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before year’s end.
Stachelberg cited recent public statements from the White House, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Gates to back that assertion.
“The administration’s really strong statement [Monday], Sen. Reid’s statement saying they are not going to stand for a defense authorization bill that strips out the repeal measure are really strong signals that people are moving to a phase where it’s about procedures, not about the will to get this done,” Stachelberg said.
In the statement on Monday, Pfeiffer said the White House “opposes any effort to strip ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ from the National Defense Authorization Act.”
On Sunday, Gates made news when he told reporters that he supports legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but isn’t sure of the likelihood of that happening. Previously, he said waiting for the Pentagon working group report on the issue, due Dec. 1, would be the best approach for congressional action.
“I would like to see the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ but I’m not sure what the prospects for that are,” Gates said. “And we’ll just have to see.”
Jim Manley, a Reid spokesperson, said the senator wants to see passage of the defense authorization in lame duck, but added an agreement with Republicans is necessary to move forward.
“Like Defense Secretary Gates, Sen. Reid strongly supports the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to help strengthen our volunteer force and is continuing to work toward passing the repeal this year,” Manley said. “He, of course, can’t do it alone. The senator needs Republicans to at least agree to have a debate on this issue — a debate he firmly believes the Senate should have.”
In a joint statement on Tuesday, senators known for supporting repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” called for legislative action before the year’s end. Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) said the Senate “should act immediately to debate and pass” the defense authorization bill along the with the repeal language in the lame duck session.
“The Senate has passed a defense bill for forty-eight consecutive years,” the senators said. “We should not fail to meet that responsibility now, especially while our nation is at war. We must also act to put an end to the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy that not only discriminates against but also dishonors the service of gay and lesbian service members.”
The senators said a failure to act legislatively on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal could mean “a federal judge may do so unilaterally in a way that is disruptive to our troops and ongoing military efforts.” Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips issued an injunction against enforcing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that confirmed her earlier ruling striking down the statute, but her decision was stayed by a higher court upon appeal.
“It is important that ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ be dealt with this year, and it appears that the only way that can happen is if it’s on the defense bill,” the senators concluded.
Influencing moderate senators who may have voted “no” when the defense bill previously came before the Senate in September to change their votes a second time around is seen as essential for moving forward.
On Tuesday, the Human Rights Campaign announced that it deployed field organizers to eight states — Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Ohio, Virginia and West Virginia — to persuade senators there to vote in favor of the defense authorization bill and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal. According to HRC, the efforts include mobilizing veterans to speak out, holding public events and blanketing local media with pro-repeal messages.
In a statement, Joe Solmonese, HRC’s president, said lawmakers have “one last chance” in the 111th Congress to “follow the advice of the president and top military leaders by sending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to the dustbin of history.”
“It would be a travesty for a small group of senators to continue to hold hostage a bill with critical military equipment and pay raises just because some senators don’t want to even debate repeal,” Solmonese said.
The time limit for acting on legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the lame duck session is among the challenges in getting it passed. Most repeal supporters say the Senate would need two weeks to debate and vote on the defense authorization bill, and more time is needed to conference the legislation with the U.S. House.
One Republican aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the problem with passing the defense authorization bill isn’t having insufficient votes; it’s having insufficient time. The aide said waiting for a vote on defense authorization bill until December would mean repeal won’t happen this year.
“If Reid is serious about bringing this up, he needs to bring it up next week, he needs to cancel Thanksgiving recess and he needs to get it off the floor and into conference that first week of December,” the aide said.
But Stachelberg said she thinks Congress would stay in session for longer than what many Capitol Hill observers are expecting and would have more time to act on the defense authorization bill.
“Congress has to pass a [continuing resolution] and deal with expiring tax cuts,” Stachelberg said. “We anticipate that these issues will take longer than most people anticipate. A longer lame duck increases the likelihood of passing the defense authorization bill with ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ in it.”
Even with a longer lame duck session, whether “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is a priority for the administration remains in question.
Last week, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs didn’t mention repeal when asked during a news conference about legislative priorities in the lame duck session of Congress. Instead, Gibbs mentioned extending tax cuts to middle-class Americans and ratification of the START treaty, a nuclear arms reduction agreement with Russia.
Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, criticized the remarks and said the administration needs to make clear that it’ll push for repeal during lame duck.
“These omissions stand in stark contrast to what the president and his staff are saying elsewhere,” Nicholson said. “Mr. President, either your administration is with us or it’s against us, and a mediocre level of public advocacy from your White House is not standing with us.”
Stachelberg said she thinks Dan Pfeiffer’s statement on Monday offers a better sense of what the White House is thinking as opposed to Gibbs’ comments.
“Rather than looking earlier in the day from Gibbs’ comments … I would look to the later comments from Dan Pfeiffer showing that the administration really does care that this gets done and that they’ll stand firm on the defense authorization bill in ensuring that it includes ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal,” she said.
Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said he’s “very concerned” Gibbs didn’t list the defense authorization bill as a priority for the lame duck session, but said he doesn’t think in that instance the White House press secretary “was speaking for the president.”
“The president has made it clear to some of us that he wants to get this done in the lame duck and I believe the president will be good on his word on this,” Sarvis said.
Another possible game changer for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal is the completion of the Pentagon working group study on implementing an end to the law. The group has a deadline of Dec. 1 to deliver its report to the defense secretary, but one source said a draft copy is already circulating within the Pentagon.
Sarvis mentioned the circulation of the draft copy and said his understanding is Levin has asked the Pentagon for a report on the status of the Pentagon working group’s recommendations.
“It’s appropriate that he do so when we know that a draft of that report is being circulated and that a draft of that report is in the hands of each one of the service chiefs,” Sarvis said.
Last weekend, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos, who assumed his position as service chief last month, said now isn’t the time for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and that he’s trying to determine how to “measure that risk” of ending the law.
On Monday, the general’s comments were rebuked by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen, who said he was “surprised” by Amos’ remarks and surprised he said them publicly.
Sarvis said he thinks what he called Amos’ “tirade” is related to “his being disappointed in what he saw in that report.” Media reports have stated the report will reveal that a majority of U.S. troops don’t care if gays are serving openly in the U.S. armed forces.
Could the report bolster legislative efforts to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”? Stachelberg said the Dec. 1 deadline for the report gives senators ample time to review the findings and take action in lame duck.
“Gates’ comments over the weekend, I think, suggest that this study — in alignment with the legislative process — will be positive,” she said.
The Center for American Progress has identified 10 senators who’ve said they want to see the Pentagon study to help inform their decision on lifting the military’s gay ban.
Among them are Sens. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), McCain, Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), George Voinovich (R-Ohio) and Jim Webb (D-Va.). The newly elected senators who, because of state election laws, are expected to take their seats during lame duck — Mark Kirk of Illinois and Joe Manchin of West Virginia — have also made statements along these lines.
“Some of these had opportunities to vote for or against repeal in either the House or Senate Armed Services Armed Committee, but each of them took the opportunity to say that — notwithstanding their ‘no’ votes — they wanted to see the complete assessment before Congress moves forward,” Stachelberg said. “We believe this gives them an opportunity to do so.”
Sarvis said he thinks the completion of this report, as well as Gates’ comments saying he wants congressional action on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” will be helpful in moving moderate senators to support repeal.
“I believe the report is going to satisfy a number of those senators who said they didn’t want to vote until that report was finished and they didn’t want to vote until they heard from Secretary Gates,” Sarvis said. “Well, they heard from Secretary Gates and they’re going to have the report shortly.”
The election of Kirk in Illinois has been nettlesome to many supporters of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because he voted against a repeal measure as a U.S. House member, and, upon taking his seat in lame duck, would replace Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.), among the strongest supporters of repeal.
Sarvis said Kirk’s position is “not entirely clear,” but emphasized that the newly elected wouldn’t even be in the Senate if Reid schedules the defense authorization bill for a vote early in the lame session.
“If the Senate moves to lay the bill down the week of the 15th when they come back, and we have the critical vote to proceed in November, Sen. Burris will still be in the Senate,” Sarvis said. “The secretary of state of Illinois has indicated that there will not be any certification [to seat Kirk] until December.”
Among those senators identified by the Center for American Progress, McCain has opposed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal even before the Pentagon announced its intention to end the law. Repeal advocates have said they believe McCain will continue to oppose an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” no matter the results of the report.
But Stachelberg said the completion of the report may prompt McCain to at least drop his objection to moving the defense authorization bill as a whole to the Senate floor.
“I think he will continue to vote ‘no’ on repeal,” she said. “I think it’s a question about whether he will obstruct and stand in the way of passage of a defense authorization bill — a bill that he has cared about for years.”
After the completion of the Pentagon study, it’s possible that members of the Senate Armed Services Committee would call for hearings to examine the working group’s findings. Having to wait for hearings could delay congressional action on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
But Rudy DeLeon, senior vice president of national security and international policy for the Center for American Progress Action Fund, said the Senate can take action to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before holding hearings on the issue.
DeLeon noted that the legislation pending before Congress has a 60-day waiting period from the time that repeal is certified to the time that an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is enacted.
“There really is a clock that will give the military a full voice, give the military a seat at the table, so the Joint Chiefs and the combatant commanders will certainly be able to offer their views on the implementation of the repeal,” he said.
National
HRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey
Organization cites rise in homophobic, transphobic policies, worse mental health outcomes
The Human Rights Campaign is slamming the White House — and the Department of Education — following their removal of some LGBTQ bullying data from federal data collection.
The Civil Rights Data Collection is a mandated survey of all public school districts that collects figures on a wide variety of statistics about students — including demographics that include race, ethnicity, sex, disability status, and English learner status; course-level enrollment data, such as how many students are enrolled in advanced placement or honors classes; and school climate information, such as rates of bullying, harassment, suspensions, and expulsions.
That data collection has been ongoing since 1968 — nearly six decades — but now has a major change in what questions are being asked, or not asked, that advocates are largely attributing to the Trump-Vance administration’s culture war fight on LGBTQ children in the country.
Changes to the 2025-2026 survey questions — approved by the Office of Budget and Management in July — eliminated a space for schools to report how many students identify as nonbinary, how often those students are victims of harassment and bullying, and whether school districts have policies prohibiting gender identity-based incidents.
K-12 Dive, a publication that focuses its reporting on news related to K-12 education, first published a list of these data collection changes from 2024-2025 to 2025-2026.
These questions, as well as others that included LGBTQ student topics on treatment in schools, were added to the CRDC under the Biden-Harris administration. By including these questions, policymakers hoped this would lead to increased investigations into discrimination complaints, initiate compliance reviews, and provide policy guidance to districts, according to Education Department documents.
The CRDC also eliminated the mention of “gender identity” from the definition of rape and sexual assault. The prior collection of data (before the Trump-Vance administration changed it) defined rape as something that could be done to “all students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation, or gender identity.” Now, the new data collection questions say, “All students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation can be victims of rape,” removing “gender identity” from the new definition.
By removing and changing definitions, this could have a real-world impact on some of the school’s most vulnerable students. According to CRDC data from 2021-2022, more than 1,800 school districts reported enrolling one or more nonbinary students.
Additional data also shows that the changes to data collection is harming public school students. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee released a report in April finding that the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to all but close the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights has left students facing discrimination and harassment throughout the country without the federal recourse they are entitled to under federal law.
The Williams Institute, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, has data indicating the true number of nonbinary and transgender children is much higher — they estimate that for children ages 13 to 17, nearly 724,000 identify as nonbinary or trans.
This is in line with a slew of policies pushed by the Trump-Vance administration since their federal takeover. Within his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” This directive attempts to make the federal definition of gender unchangeable, determined by sex assigned at birth alone.
Within his first month of his second term, Trump issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.
He also pushed multiple anti-trans executive orders, including Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” and Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” targeting trans athletes and military members, respectively.
These policies have a real-world impact on trans people.
The Trevor Project, a nonprofit dedicated to crisis and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people under 25, reported that, for the seventh year in a row, LGBTQ youth are at higher risk for suicide as a result of mistreatment and stigmatization.
Trevor Project data showed that nearly 60 percent of LGBTQ young people ages 13-17 said they were bullied in the past year, and that 36 percent of LGBTQ youth seriously considered suicide in the last year. The data shows a bigger discrepancy for trans youth, with that number hovering around 40 percent considering suicide.
HRC President Kelley Robinson issued a statement following the approval of the new data collection questions that leaves LGBTQ students’ bullying statistics under — if not completely unreported.
“If there was even a shadow of a doubt, this latest move by the Trump administration makes it abundantly clear they do not care about the safety of LGBTQ+ students, and trans students in particular,” Robinson said. “These are adults who should be protecting our kids. And instead, they are making sure bullying and harassment are not tracked. If they are not tracked, bullying and harassment cannot be prevented or stopped — which is exactly what the Trump administration wants. Parents deserve to know their kids are safe at school, and every single young person deserves dignity and safety at school. Anything less is plain evil.”
HRC has a “Welcoming Schools” initiative that they say is the “most comprehensive” bias-based bullying prevention program in the nation. The program includes LGBTQ and gender-inclusive resources for schools, help navigating special education and disability resources for LGBTQ-identifying students, and other tools to help schools become more inclusive.
This program has been in effect for nearly two decades and, according to HRC, reaches nearly 750,000 students.
The Washington Blade reached out to both the Department of Education and Office of Management and Budget for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.
Michigan
Progressives score victory as El-Sayed wins Mich. Senate primary
Democratic newcomer will face Rogers in November
Michigan held its primary on Tuesday, allowing the two major political parties to select their nominees to go head-to-head for the state’s U.S. Senate seat.
NBC News called the Democratic race early, giving the victory to physician Abdul El-Sayed over incumbent U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in an extremely close primary. El-Sayed won 48.5 percent of the primary vote, with Stevens trailing by just one percentage point at 47.5 percent.
Both candidates have campagined on supporting the LGBTQ community through different avenues— for El-Sayed he focused on his past promoting HIV and PrEP funding and research. Stevens focused on her legislative history working to support transgender rights in the state.
This is a major win for progressive Democrats, who have been bearing the brunt of political attacks from President Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and centrist Democrats.
El-Sayed, a former health director in Detroit, ran his campaign largely on making life in the Great Lakes State more affordable amid rising costs. His policies include promoting “Medicare for All,” pushing health policy that targets the regressive efforts of the Trump-Vance administration that rolls back funding for both Women and LGBTQ people, minimizing the growing amount of money in politics, and he was very vocal in his criticism of Stevens for supporting aid to Israel. He was endorsed by two major progressives — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Stevens, the four-term congresswoman, is much closer to establishment Democrats on policy than El-Sayed.
During her time in the federal government, she has consistently supported the Equality Act, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She has also emphasized supporting local manufacturing and lowering housing costs in the state.
She was named to Advocates for Trans Equality’s 118th Congressional Champions list for her pro-trans policies and was endorsed by establishment heavy hitters Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
The contentious race boiled down not only to Michigan affairs but also extended to international conflicts — namely Palestine. (South Africa has filed a case in the International Court of Justice in The Hague that accuses Israel of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip after Oct. 7.) This primary also acted as one of the first major races that pushed back against AIPAC, a lobbying group that works to promote pro-Israel candidates in U.S. elections. The group has been involved in domestic politics since 1954.
AIPAC devoted a massive amount of money to this race.
The Associated Press reported that the pro-Israel lobbying group spent more than $30 million on ads against El-Sayed because of his vocal denunciation of Israel and his continued criticism of its policies towards Palestine.
Michigan has a large Muslim and Arab American population, which could, in part, explain how El-Sayed was able to win.
The Republican side was far less competitive. Former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) ran unopposed and clinched the GOP nomination. He has consistently held anti-LGBTQ positions, going as far as voting multiple times for a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, voting against repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and supporting efforts to directly target the attempted expansion of Title IX protections to include trans people.
El-Sayed will face off against Rogers in November for Michigan’s Senate seat — one that could have lasting impacts not only on the state’s politics but also on the Republicans’ narrow Senate majority and Trump’s political agenda.
National
White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits
Administration criticizes National Museum of American History
The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.
According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”
Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.
Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.
“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.
The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.
The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.
The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”
The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.
It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”
Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”
On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.
In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.
House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”
In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.
Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.
“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.
Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.
It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.
An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)
Don’t miss summer productions at Clear Space in Rehoboth Beach
New LGBTQ visitor center slated for Wilmington, Del.
PHOTOS: World Pride March
Tens of thousands take part in World Pride March
PHOTOS: Daddy Issues at Kiki
Continue to engage in community after Pride month
D.C.’s Mary’s House For Older Adults names new executive director
Suzanne Goode is not good for Rehoboth Beach
Greg Araki still wants your sex
