Connect with us

National

Murphy: Obama will ramp up efforts after ‘Don’t Ask’ report

Pa. lawmaker says repeal can happen this year

Published

on

Rep. Patrick Murphy (Blade photo by Michael Key)

The champion of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in the U.S. House maintains that President Obama will provide the “full spectrum” of engagement in getting the military’s gay ban repealed once the Pentagon completes its report on the issue.

In an interview Tuesday with the Washington Blade, Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) said Obama has been engaged in moving Congress to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and that this effort will expand once the Pentagon working group report — due Dec. 1 — is complete.

“I think there are different levels of engagement and, I think, once the report comes out, I think we’ll see the full spectrum of that engagement,” Murphy said.

The first Iraq war veteran elected to Congress said he expects this “full spectrum of engagement” to come from not only the White House, but also the president’s “own Department of Defense.”

Murphy said he hasn’t seen a draft copy of the report, but noted media reports indicating that the study will be favorable to open service in the U.S. military. He said the study should have a positive impact on senators who’ve said they wanted to wait for the report before endorsing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

“The study group came back and said that this will not hurt national security, and the troops, like most Americans, see that it’s the right thing to do,” Murphy said. “And so, now we need the senators over there who’ve been a roadblock to put the political games aside and do what’s right for our country.”

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), the sponsor of repeal legislation in the Senate, and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) sent a letter to the Pentagon on Monday calling for the report to be made available to members of Congress as soon as possible. The Human Rights Campaign issued a similar statement last week.

Asked whether he similarly thinks the report should be available now, Murphy replied, “I think they should release it as soon as it’s completely done.”

Murphy said he’s participated in discussions with Senate leadership and Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) about moving forward with the fiscal year 2011 defense budget bill, which currently contains “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

Still, the Pennsylvania lawmaker didn’t offer details on the discussions and characterized them only as “productive.”

Amid reports that talks are taking place to potentially strip the defense authorization bill of its repeal language, Murphy said Republicans have sought a bill without the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” provision.

“I think that’s what the Republicans would like to see,” Murphy said. “But I think those of us in the House and 78 percent of the American people and those in the military currently serving want to see the Senate do what’s right and repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and put it on the president’s desk, so he can sign it into law.”

With limited time remaining this Congress, it’s possible lawmakers won’t repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this year, leaving Obama to come up with another game plan — perhaps non-congressional action such as a stop-loss order — to put an end to the gay ban.

But Murphy was reluctant to call on Obama to issue a stop-loss order to end discharges under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and maintained Congress can still repeal the law this year.

“Let’s cross that bridge when we get there,” he said. “Now it’s still in the Congress’ domain to act and especially, specifically, the Senate’s domain.”

While seeing a path forward this year, Murphy doubts that Republican leadership in the 112th Congress will be willing to consider “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal as part of its agenda.

Asked whether he thinks GOP leaders in the next Congress would be willing to address the issue, Murphy replied simply, “N0.”

During his time in Congress, Murphy has been seen as a leader for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal because of his work moving a measure that would end the ban through the U.S. House.

Murphy took up sponsorship of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal legislation last year, which at the time had about 150 co-sponsors, and gradually built support for the measure.

In May, the work paid off when Murphy submitted a repeal amendment to the House floor that passed by a vote of 234-194.

The work earned Murphy considerable support among the LGBT community in his bid for re-election. Still, he didn’t survive the Republican tide on Election Day and was defeated by his GOP opponent, Mike Fitzpatrick.

But Murphy said he isn’t going to “second guess” whether his leadership on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal contributed to his loss on Election Day.

“My dad taught me that if you don’t stand for something, you fall for anything,” Murphy said. “And I was proud to stand for equality and for the troops and for national security, and I’ll continue to do so until I turn the keys over to this office on Jan. 3.”

Even with his loss, Murphy said he stands by other tough votes in his district, such his “yes” votes on the $787 billion stimulus package and health care reform.

“We stopped the worst recession from turning into a depression,” Murphy said. “As far as health care, there are millions of Americans that will now be covered, and that’s something that’s positive.”

And what’s on Murphy’s docket once his term is complete at the end of the year?

“I’m going to hug and kiss my kids and hopefully I’ll catch an Eagles game,” Murphy said. “That’s the game plan.”

The transcript of the Murphy interview follows:

ON ELECTION RESULTS

Washington Blade: What’s your take on the election results on Nov. 2? Do you think that your leadership on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal contributed to your loss on Election Day?

Rep. Patrick Murphy: You know, I’m not going to second guess anything. My dad taught me that if you don’t stand for something, you fall for anything. And I was proud to stand for equality and for the troops and for national security, and I’ll continue to do so until I turn the keys over to this office on Jan. 3.

Blade: Why do you think you think you lost on Election Day?

Murphy: I think it was a tough year for Democrats, and I think my opponent ran a great campaign, and I’m proud of the support that we had, but it was an historic wave that we got caught up in, but … we’re going to continue to stand for middle-class families and for our country and do what’s right.

Blade: Is there anything over your past two terms in Congress that you regret? Anything that you think you could have done differently to win re-election?

Murphy: You know, I don’t live my life with regrets. There’s things here and there. I wish I would have played the lottery numbers differently on Saturday night. … We had an incredible time serving the families of my district and our country, and we helped protect 3,000 jobs, we helped end the war in Iraq, we helped move our country in a new direction. …

Blade: So the vote for the stimulus package, the vote for the health care bill — you stand by them today?

Murphy: Absolutely.

We stopped the worst recession since the Great — we stopped the worst recession from turning into a depression. As far as health care, there are millions of Americans that will now be covered, and that’s something that’s positive.

ON ‘DON’T ASK’ REPEAL IN LAME DUCK

Blade: How confident are you that Congress is going to be able to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the lame duck session?

Murphy: Well, we need the Senate to act. It’s in the Senate’s hands. We did our job over here in the House. I was proud to lead that effort and now we’re continuing to put the appropriate pressure on the Senate to do what’s right for national security.

We’re still in Afghanistan and Iraq and we cannot be forcing honorable men and women who are willing to take a bullet to keep our families safe to be thrown out just because they happen to be gay.

Blade: Are there any conditions that you think need to be met — anything that you think needs to happen — to muster enough support for the Senate to move forward?

Murphy: I think we’ll see — we need the senators, especially on the Republican side, to do what’s right for our troops, and I think it couldn’t be more clear. A lot of them said, “Well, let’s see what the study group says.” Well, the study group came back and said that this will not hurt national security, and the troops, like most Americans, see that it’s the right thing to do.

And so, now we need the senators over there who’ve been a roadblock to put the political games aside and do what’s right for our country.

Blade: Have you had conversations with Senate leadership or Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin about moving forward with the defense authorization bill in lame duck?

Murphy: Yes.

Blade: How would you characterize those conversations?

Murphy: Productive.

Blade: What made them so productive?

Murphy: You’ll see.

Blade: How serious do you think this talk is of moving forward with the defense authorization bill with the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” language stripped? Is that a serious option that’s on the table?

Murphy: I think that’s what the Republicans would like to see. But I think those of us in the House and 78 percent of the American people and those in the military currently serving want to see the Senate do what’s right and repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and put it on the president’s desk, so he can sign it into law.

Blade: You mentioned the media reports on the Pentagon study. Do you see that having an impact right now on influencing some senators who were on the fence in getting them to support “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal?

Murphy: I hope so because they looked their constituents and the American public in the eye and said, “As soon as this working group comes back, we’ll do the right thing on what it says.” Well, the report came out, it shows how the American military feels that this is a non-issue and that there is … 26 other countries who allow their members to serve openly, and for the American troops, it’s offensive to them to think that they’re not as professional as 26 other countries.

So, hopefully, our senators recognize that and will do what’s right.

Blade: Have you seen the draft report?

Murphy: No.

Blade: Should the Pentagon release the report immediately — the official report? And, if they do that, what kind of impact do you think that would have on getting the ball rolling?

Murphy: I would like to read it, and I would like to see it, and I look forward to reading it.

Blade: But should they release that report immediately?

Murphy: I think they should release it as soon as it’s completely done.

ON THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

Blade: Do you think President Obama has been engaged in getting the Senate to move forward with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in lame duck?

Murphy: Um, uh, yes.

Blade: What evidence do you see of him doing that?

Murphy:  Well, I think there’s different levels of engagement and, I think, once the report comes out, I think we’ll see the full spectrum of that engagement.

Blade: During a recent press conference, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs didn’t identify “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal as among the legislative items the president wants to see in lame duck. Is that of concern to you?

Murphy: I think they were waiting for the report to come out. The report is days away from coming out officially — and not just excerpts of it that we’ve all read.

Blade: Is there anything more right now that the president could be doing to get the Senate to move forward with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal?

Murphy: I think once the report comes out we’ll see the full spectrum of engagement from — and the appropriate amount of engagement from the White House once that report comes out from his own Department of Defense.

Blade: Do you think Defense Secretary Robert Gates right now is being engaged in getting the Senate to move forward with the defense authorization with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal?

Murphy: I look forward to Gen. [Carter] Ham’s testimony on Thursday.

Blade: But do you think Secretary Gates is engaged?

Murphy: I look forward to Gen. Ham’s testimony on Thursday.

Blade: Do you think that this process — having a year-long study to examine “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — was the appropriate way to address the issue? Do you think it jeopardized legislative efforts for repeal by leaving only a small window open for action in lame duck?

Murphy: Well, I think the premise behind the study was that — how we’re going to implement “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” [repeal], not if we’re going to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” So, I think it’s interesting — to read that report and how we’re going to implement it.

But the reality of this is I think that we have time to act. We all serve until Jan. 3, and we need to get out there.

Blade: There’s also been some action in courts. A California federal court ruled “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” unconstitutional, and for eight days, had an injunction in place preventing enforcement of the law. Do you think it was a mistake for the Obama administration to appeal this ruling?

Murphy: Well, you know, it’s interesting. I actually met a soldier who went and enlisted after that injunction came out. And then, … he was going to get his physical and they had to withdraw.

I think that’s why it’s very clear that Congress needs to do its job and that we can’t punt this to the courts or to the White House. We need to get after it and finally repeal the law that Congress put into place 16 years ago. …

Blade: In the event that Congress doesn’t repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in lame duck, do you think the president should issue a stop-loss order to stop the discharges?

Murphy: Let’s cross that bridge when we get there. Now it’s still in the Congress’ domain to act and especially, specifically, the Senate’s domain.

ON THE NEXT CONGRESS

Blade: In the event that Congress can’t do it this year —

Murphy: Congress can do it this year. We all serve until Jan. 3.

Blade: Do you think the 112th Congress will be in an equal position to appeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” compared to the 111th Congress?

Murphy: I guess time will tell. We’ll see.

Blade: Do you think Republican leadership in the House will be willing to consider “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal?

Murphy: No.

Blade: If this fight continues, can you recommend someone in the 112th Congress who can take up the mantle of “Don’t Ask, Don’t  Tell” repeal in the U.S. House?

Murphy: Let’s get it done in the 111th Congress now. …

ON HIS PERSONAL FUTURE

Blade: Once your term expires, what do you plan to pursue when you go back to Pennsylvania?

Murphy: I’m going to hug and kiss my kids and hopefully I’ll catch an Eagles game. That’s the game plan.

Blade: Is there an occupation that you intend to pursue?

Murphy: We’ll see.

Blade: Do you plan on continuing to be an advocate for open service in the military?

Murphy: I continue to plan on serving my country in some capacity and fighting for the lives that I believe in to make our country even greater.

Blade: And open service in the military is among them?

Murphy: Yes.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Federal Courts

Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups

Lambda Legal filed the lawsuit in federal court

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A federal judge on Monday blocked the enforcement of three of President Donald Trump’s executive orders that would have threatened to defund nonprofit organizations providing health care and services for LGBTQ people and those living with HIV.

The preliminary injunction was awarded by Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in a case, San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, filed by Lambda Legal and eight other organizations.

Implementation of the executive orders — two aimed at diversity, equity, and inclusion along with one targeting the transgender community — will be halted pending the outcome of the litigation challenging them.

“This is a critical win — not only for the nine organizations we represent, but for LGBTQ communities and people living with HIV across the country,” said Jose Abrigo, Lambda Legal’s HIV Project director and senior counsel on the case. 

“The court blocked anti-equity and anti-LGBTQ executive orders that seek to erase transgender people from public life, dismantle DEI efforts, and silence nonprofits delivering life-saving services,” Abrigo said. “Today’s ruling acknowledges the immense harm these policies inflict on these organizations and the people they serve and stops Trump’s orders in their tracks.”

Tigar wrote, in his 52-page decision, “While the Executive requires some degree of freedom to implement its political agenda, it is still bound by the constitution.”

“And even in the context of federal subsidies, it cannot weaponize Congressionally appropriated funds to single out protected communities for disfavored treatment or suppress ideas that it does not like or has deemed dangerous,” he said.

Without the preliminary injunction, the judge wrote, “Plaintiffs face the imminent loss of federal funding critical to their ability to provide lifesaving healthcare and support services to marginalized LGBTQ populations,” a loss that “not only threatens the survival of critical programs but also forces plaintiffs to choose between their constitutional rights and their continued existence.”

The organizations in the lawsuit are located in California (San Francisco AIDS Foundation, Los Angeles LGBT Center, GLBT Historical Society, and San Francisco Community Health Center), Arizona (Prisma Community Care), New York (The NYC LGBT Community Center), Pennsylvania (Bradbury-Sullivan Community Center), Maryland (Baltimore Safe Haven), and Wisconsin (FORGE).

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Activists rally for Andry Hernández Romero in front of Supreme Court

Gay asylum seeker ‘forcibly deported’ to El Salvador, described as political prisoner

Published

on

Immigrant Defenders Law Center President Lindsay Toczylowski, on right, speaks in support of her client, Andry Hernández Romero, in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 6, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

More than 200 people gathered in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday and demanded the Trump-Vance administration return to the U.S. a gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who it “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador.

Lindsay Toczylowski, president of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a Los Angeles-based organization that represents Andry Hernández Romero, is among those who spoke alongside U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Human Rights Campaign Campaigns and Communications Vice President Jonathan Lovitz. Sarah Longwell of the Bulwark, Pod Save America’s Jon Lovett, and Tim Miller are among those who also participated in the rally.

“Andry is a son, a brother. He’s an actor, a makeup artist,” said Toczylowski. “He is a gay man who fled Venezuela because it was not safe for him to live there as his authentic self.”

(Video by Michael K. Lavers)

The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”

President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The Trump-Vance administration subsequently “forcibly removed” Hernández and hundreds of other Venezuelans to El Salvador.

Toczylowski said she believes Hernández remains at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT. Toczylowski also disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.

“Andry fled persecution in Venezuela and came to the U.S. to seek protection. He has no criminal history. He is not a member of the Tren de Aragua gang. Yet because of his crown tattoos, we believe at this moment that he sits in a torture prison, a gulag, in El Salvador,” said Toczylowski. “I say we believe because we have not had any proof of life for him since the day he was put on a U.S. government-funded plane and forcibly disappeared to El Salvador.”

“Andry is not alone,” she added.

Takano noted the federal government sent his parents, grandparents, and other Japanese Americans to internment camps during World War II under the Alien Enemies Act. The gay California Democrat also described Hernández as “a political prisoner, denied basic rights under a law that should have stayed in the past.”

“He is not a case number,” said Takano. “He is a person.”

Hernández had been pursuing his asylum case while at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego.

A hearing had been scheduled to take place on May 30, but an immigration judge the day before dismissed his case. Immigrant Defenders Law Center has said it will appeal the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which the Justice Department oversees.

“We will not stop fighting for Andry, and I know neither will you,” said Toczylowski.

Friday’s rally took place hours after Attorney General Pam Bondi said Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who the Trump-Vance administration wrongfully deported to El Salvador, had returned to the U.S. Abrego will face federal human trafficking charges in Tennessee.

Continue Reading

National

A husband’s story: Michael Carroll reflects on life with Edmund White

Iconic author died this week; ‘no sunnier human in the world’

Published

on

Michael Carroll spoke to the Blade after the death his husband Edmund White this week. (Photo by Michael Carroll)

Unlike most gay men of my generation, I’ve only been to Fire Island twice. Even so, the memory of my first visit has never left me. The scenery was lovely, and the boys were sublime — but what stood out wasn’t the beach or the parties. It was a quiet afternoon spent sipping gin and tonics in a mid-century modern cottage tucked away from the sand and sun.

Despite Fire Island’s reputation for hedonism, our meeting was more accident than escapade. Michael Carroll — a Facebook friend I’d chatted with but never met — mentioned that he and his husband, Ed, would be there that weekend, too. We agreed to meet for a drink. On a whim, I checked his profile and froze. Ed was author Edmund White.

I packed a signed copy of Carroll’s “Little Reef” and a dog-eared hardback of “A Boy’s Own Story,” its spine nearly broken from rereads. I was excited to meet both men and talk about writing, even briefly.

Yesterday, I woke to the news that Ed had passed away. Ironically, my first thought was of Michael.

This week, tributes to Edmund White are everywhere — rightly celebrating his towering legacy as a novelist, essayist, and cultural icon. I’ve read all of his books, and I could never do justice to the scope of a career that defined and chronicled queer life for more than half a century. I’ll leave that to better-prepared journalists.

But in those many memorials, I’ve noticed something missing. When Michael Carroll is mentioned, it’s usually just a passing reference: “White’s partner of thirty years, twenty-five years his junior.” And yet, in the brief time I spent with this couple on Fire Island, it was clear to me that Michael was more than a footnote — he was Ed’s anchor, editor, companion, and champion. He was the one who knew his husband best.

They met in 1995 after Michael wrote Ed a fan letter to tell him he was coming to Paris. “He’d lost the great love of his life a year before,” Michael told me. “In one way, I filled a space. Understand, I worshiped this man and still do.”

When I asked whether there was a version of Ed only he knew, Michael answered without hesitation: “No sunnier human in the world, obvious to us and to people who’ve only just or never met him. No dark side. Psychology had helped erase that, I think, or buffed it smooth.”

Despite the age difference and divergent career arcs, their relationship was intellectually and emotionally symbiotic. “He made me want to be elegant and brainy; I didn’t quite reach that, so it led me to a slightly pastel minimalism,” Michael said. “He made me question my received ideas. He set me free to have sex with whoever I wanted. He vouchsafed my moods when they didn’t wobble off axis. Ultimately, I encouraged him to write more minimalistically, keep up the emotional complexity, and sleep with anyone he wanted to — partly because I wanted to do that too.”

Fully open, it was a committed relationship that defied conventional categories. Ed once described it as “probably like an 18th-century marriage in France.” Michael elaborated: “It means marriage with strong emotion — or at least a tolerance for one another — but no sex; sex with others. I think.”

That freedom, though, was always anchored in deep devotion and care — and a mutual understanding that went far beyond art, philosophy, or sex. “He believed in freedom and desire,” Michael said, “and the two’s relationship.”

When I asked what all the essays and articles hadn’t yet captured, Michael paused. “Maybe that his writing was tightly knotted, but that his true personality was vulnerable, and that he had the defense mechanisms of cheer and optimism to conceal that vulnerability. But it was in his eyes.”

The moment that captured who Ed was to him came at the end. “When he was dying, his second-to-last sentence (garbled then repeated) was, ‘Don’t forget to pay Merci,’ the cleaning lady coming the next day. We had had a rough day, and I was popping off like a coach or dad about getting angry at his weakness and pushing through it. He took it almost like a pack mule.” 

Edmund White’s work shaped generations — it gave us language for desire, shame, wit, and liberation. But what lingers just as powerfully is the extraordinary life Ed lived with a man who saw him not only as a literary giant but as a real person: sunny, complex, vulnerable, generous.

In the end, Ed’s final words to his husband weren’t about his books or his legacy. They were about care, decency, and love. “You’re good,” he told Michael—a benediction, a farewell, maybe even a thank-you.

And now, as the world celebrates the prolific writer and cultural icon Edmund White, it feels just as important to remember the man and the person who knew him best. Not just the story but the characters who stayed to see it through to the end.

Continue Reading

Popular