National
Pentagon official: No ‘Don’t Ask’ report before Dec. 1
Senate panel questions Gen. Ham on study
A co-chair of the Pentagon’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” working group has said he doesn’t think an upcoming report on implementing repeal will be complete before the Dec. 1 deadline — despite requests from lawmakers and LGBT advocates to make the study available earlier.
Army Gen. Carter Ham, one of two co-chairs leading the Defense Department working group, made the remarks during his confirmation hearing on Thursday before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The four-star general has been nominated to become commander of U.S. Africa Command.
During the hearing, Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) noted Ham said prior to his testimony he wasn’t authorized to discuss the content of the report at this time. The committee chair reiterated his commitment to hold hearings and hear testimony from Ham shortly after the working group provides the report to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Still, Levin said he had questions about the timing of the report and asked whether the Pentagon working group, which Ham co-chairs along with Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson, would be finished with its study before the Dec. 1 deadline.
Ham replied that he thinks “it will take until the first of December” for the Pentagon working group to complete its work because those crafting the report are still awaiting input from the military service secretaries and service chiefs.
“The key factor remaining for us in the review group is to receive the review and comment by the service chiefs and service secretaries, which is ongoing,” Ham said. “We anticipate their comments soon, Mr. Johnson and I will review those comments, make final adjustments to the report, which is currently in draft form and then deliver to the secretary of defense on 1 December.”
Asked by Levin whether the group could make “every effort” to make the report available before Dec. 1, Ham replied, “Yes sir, in consultation with the secretary’s office.”
On Monday, Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) sent a letter to the Pentagon asking for the release of the report “as soon as possible.” The Human Rights Campaign issued a similar statement on the report last week and argued that an early release of the report could influence fence-sitting senators who have yet to endorse “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.
Also during the hearing, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a strong opponent of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and critic of the Pentagon report, asked questions suggesting the survey that was conducted as part of the working group’s efforts was biased in favor of repeal.
Over the summer, the Pentagon sent out 400,000 surveys to active duty service members to solicit their views on serving alongside openly gay troops in the U.S. military. According to a recent media report in the Washington Post, the survey found that more than 70 percent of respondents think the effect of ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would be positive, mixed or nonexistent.
McCain asked whether 400,000 surveys were indeed sent out, which Ham confirmed, and then asked how many responses were received. Ham said the Pentagon group received a little more than 115,000 responses.
“Like 25 percent?” McCain continued, suggesting that the response rate was too low to consider the data valid.
But Ham corrected the Arizona senator and said the received responses made up 28 percent of the surveys sent out.
McCain also asked questions about the wording of the survey and suggested bias in favor of repeal was present here as well.
“Isn’t it true that the survey said in a preamble — said DOD is considering changes to the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy that quote ‘would allow gay and lesbian service members to serve in the military without risk of separation because of their sexual orientation,'” McCain said. “Is that true?”
Ham confirmed that this wording was indeed part of the preamble for the survey.
The content of recent media reports about the upcoming report was also discussed during the hearing. Lieberman asked whether the information revealed by the leaks was “just one part” of what the Pentagon group intended to do and inquired about other information that would emerge.
Ham responded by outlining the terms of reference for the report and said there were “two tasks.” One was to assess the impact of repeal on concerns such as battle effectiveness and recruitment, and the other was to develop a plan to implement an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
The general noted the working group obtained information from service members through surveys, focus groups, an online inbox and town hall meetings. To obtain to views of gay service memebers currently in the armed forces without outing them under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Ham said the working group established a “confidential conversation mechanism” through a third-party company.
“All in all, senator, we believe this is probably, as far as I could tell, the most comprehensive assessment of a personnel policy matter that the Department of Defense has conducted,” Ham concluded.
Lieberman said he agrees that the report is “very comprehensive” and “should inform the decision that Congress makes in voting.”
Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), who in May opposed a repeal amendment in committee, also praised the report during the hearing and emphasized it should guide congressional action on the issue.
“I think it’s important, if I may, to quote from what Sen. Lieberman just said,” Webb said. “He said this study ‘should inform the decision that the Congress makes in voting.’ We tend to forget that in our political haste here. This is a very important study for us, not simply to receive, but to examine and to discuss.”
A former Navy secretary, Webb noted he spent five years at the Pentagon and said he “can’t remember a study on this type of issue that has been done with this sort of care.”
“Not even having seen it or knowing the results, but I know the preparation that went into it,” Webb said. “So it’s going to be a very important study for us to look at and examine.”
U.S. Federal Courts
Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups
Lambda Legal filed the lawsuit in federal court

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).
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

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.
National
A husband’s story: Michael Carroll reflects on life with Edmund White
Iconic author died this week; ‘no sunnier human in the world’

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.
-
World Pride 202522 hours ago
WorldPride recap: Festival, parade, fireworks, and Doechii
-
U.S. Federal Courts1 day ago
Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups
-
Photos1 day ago
PHOTOS: WorldPride Parade
-
World Pride 20254 days ago
LGBTQ voices echo from the Lincoln Memorial at International Rally for Freedom