National
Gibbs unsure if ‘Don’t Ask’ report will influence military chiefs
White House spokesperson: Legislative action best way to end law
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he doesn't "want to presume" how the Pentagon "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" report will influence service chiefs.. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on Monday said he’s unsure whether the results of the Pentagon study on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will move the four service chiefs to support an end to the law as he suggested that unanimous support among the military leaders won’t be necessary for moving forward.
Asked by the Washington Blade whether President Obama anticipates that the service chiefs will favor repeal following the completion of the Pentagon report, Gibbs said he doesn’t “want to presume” where they would stand after the study is finished, noting the president hasn’t yet seen it.
“I think the service chiefs as I understand it are meeting with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the secretary as we get closer to this report coming out in order to discuss where they are based on that survey,” Gibbs said. “The president has not yet seen that survey, so I don’t want to presume whether based on those results that would change their opinions on it.”
Pressed to clarify whether the intent of the year-long study was to bring the military leaders such as the service chiefs on board with repeal, Gibbs hinted that “whether you have unanimous agreement or not” among the military leaders isn’t necessary to move forward.
“The president has known where people have stood on this policy for as long as he’s supported changing that policy,” Gibbs said. “So, I think it will be important to again view the attitudes and to use those attitudes to craft a pathway to implementing a changed legislative policy.”
Gibbs also implied that the president hasn’t recently spoken to the service chiefs about getting them to support repeal during the lame duck session of Congress as he noted Obama had previously spoken to them on this issue.
“I know the president has spoken previously with the service chiefs on this subject and expect that as this report is finalized and released that he’ll have an opportunity to speak directly with the chair, the vice-chair and the service chiefs as the process moves forward,” Gibbs said.
Obama has said — notably in January during the State of the Union address — that part of his effort in repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is working with the military to make it happen. The Pentagon working group, established by Defense Secretary Robert Gates in February, was seen as part of this process.
The service chiefs have heretofore been against the legislative effort to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” In May, the service chiefs of the Navy, Army, Air Force and Marine Corps sent a joint letter to Congress urging lawmakers to wait for the Pentagon report — now set for release on Nov. 30 — before taking action.
But in an interview Saturday with the National Journal, Navy Chief of Staff. Adm. Gary Roughead reportedly praised the Pentagon report — and the surveys sent to 400,000 service members that were a component of that study — and said he’s “just trying to put it all in context.”
“I think the survey, without question, was the most expansive survey of the American military that’s ever been undertaken,” Roughead was quoted as saying. “I think the work that has been done is extraordinary.”
The Navy chief reportedly added that he’s “eager to see” where repeal “goes on the Hill.”
The last public statements of the Army and Air Force chiefs have them on the record as wanting to Congress to hold off before pursuing legislative action. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos last month took on the mantle as head of his service, and he has spoken out against repeal.
A number of U.S. senators have said they’re awaiting testimony from military service chiefs before making a decision on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” In his defense of the law, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has emphasized that the service chiefs — in particular Amos — have asked Congress to hold off on legislative action. A spokesperson for Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) has recently said the senator is awaiting testimony from the service chiefs before making a decision on the issue.
Also during the news conference, Gibbs counted “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal among the legislative items that Obama wants to see happen during the lame duck session of Congress and argued that legislative action is better than having the courts overturn the law. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has committed to a vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before the year’s end.
“There are issues around ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ that the president and, I think, many people believe are best dealt with through the legislative process and not through a legal system,” Gibbs said.
Gibbs maintained that overturning the gay ban through court order is “not likely to provide the Pentagon and others with a pathway” for implementing repeal and said “doing this legislatively” is the best way to end the law.
—————————-
A partial transcript of Gibbs’ remarks on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” follows:
Robert Gibbs [on the legislative agenda for lame duck]: … There are issues around “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that the president and, I think, many people believe are best dealt with through the legislative process and not through a legal system. …
National Public Radio: Has the president asked the Pentagon has the Pentagon to hurry up to Nov. 30 the report — it’s internal report —
Gibbs: I think the original date was Dec. 1. Obviously, the report is being released a day or so early in order to have some informed hearings on the survey and its results. I think those, hearings, if I’m not mistaken, start on the 1st.
But I think it’s important if you look at what others have said particularly — take for instance Secretary Gates — we know we can do this legislatively. The House has done this; the Senate can do this — do this legislatively, which provides an avenue to implement the policy. The court doing this is not likely to provide the Pentagon and others with a pathway for doing this, and I think in order to do this in a way that the president want to see that doing this legislatively is the best way to do this. …
Washington Blade: Robert, back on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the service chief of the Navy recently praised the Pentagon report and said he’s eager to see what happens with the Hill with regard to repeal. But the remaining three service chiefs — they’re all on the record as saying they want to wait for the report to come out before Congress takes action. Does the president that once the report comes out, the service chiefs will be on board in favor of repeal?
Robert Gibbs: I don’t — I think the service chiefs as I understand it are meeting with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the secretary as we get closer to this report coming out in order to discuss where they are based on that survey. The president has not yet seen that survey, so I don’t want to presume whether based on those results that would change their opinions on it. I think it’s best not to get too far down the road on commenting on that until we chance to personally see the substance.
Blade: But wasn’t that the purpose of the study, though? You’ve said the president has supported repeal since you’ve known him, and the president has said he wants to work with military leaders — in the State of the Union address — he said he wants to work with military leaders to get them on board with repeal. So, what the point of this report if not to get those service chiefs on [board]?
Gibbs: I’m not saying they won’t. I’m just saying — I think the original question you asked me is would that report change their mind. I haven’t seen the report, and the president hasn’t seen that report and neither of us have had an opportunity to talk with the chiefs. That’s not to say that it won’t; that’s not to say that — and quite frankly, that’s not to say whether or not — whether you have unanimous agreement or not that the policy — look, the president is going where people have stood on this policy for as long as he supported changing that policy. So, I think it will be important to again view the attitudes and to use those attitudes to craft a pathway to implementing a changed legislative policy.
That’s what the president has advocated through this process. Again, I can’t — we may have a better sense of that when we get an opportunity to talk to those who have seen the report and get a chance to look at that report ourselves.
Blade: Has the president had conversations directly with the service chiefs to get them in favor of legislative repeal during the lame duck session of Congress?
Gibbs: I know the president has spoken previously with the service chiefs on this subject and expect that as this report is finalized and released that he’ll have an opportunity to speak directly with the chair, the vice-chair and the service chiefs as the process moves forward.
Watch a video of the exchange here (via Think Progress):
New York
Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced
One of the victims, John Umberger, was D.C. political consultant
A New York judge on Wednesday sentenced three men convicted of killing a D.C. political consultant and another man who they targeted at gay bars in Manhattan.
NBC New York notes a jury in February convicted Jayqwan Hamilton, Jacob Barroso, and Robert DeMaio of murder, robbery, and conspiracy in relation to druggings and robberies that targeted gay bars in Manhattan from March 2021 to June 2022.
John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant from D.C., and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, died. Prosecutors said Hamilton, Barroso, and DeMaio targeted three other men at gay bars.
The jury convicted Hamilton and DeMaio of murdering Umberger. State Supreme Court Judge Felicia Mennin sentenced Hamilton and DeMaio to 40 years to life in prison.
Barroso, who was convicted of killing Ramirez, received a 20 years to life sentence.
National
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources
Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.
“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.
“These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.
It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”
The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question.
A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit.
While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.
Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.
“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.
“Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says.
Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”
Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”
Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.
“As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from the Washington Blade.
“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said.
The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”
It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”
The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society.
The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.
While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”
“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.
The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.
Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.
Laverne Cox, Reneé Rapp, Deacon Maccubbin named WorldPride grand marshals
House passes reconciliation with gender-affirming care funding ban
PHOTOS: D.C. Trans Pride
Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
WorldPride events round-up
Pope Leo XIV: Family based on ‘stable union between a man and a woman’
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
