National
Report finds limited difficulty in lifting ‘Don’t Ask’
Gates urges Congress to repeal ban by year’s end


Defense Secretary Robert Gates has renewed his call for Congress to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" by the year's end. (Blade photo by Michael Key)
The Pentagon on Tuesday released its long-awaited “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” report — which found open service can be implemented in the armed forces with limited disruption to the military — as Defense Secretary Robert Gates renewed his call for Congress to repeal the gay ban by the year’s end.
“Now that we have completed this review, I strongly urge the Senate to pass this legislation and send it to the president for his signature before the end of this year,” Gates said during a news conference.
Gates continued that legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is a “matter of some urgency” because of pending litigation that could strike down the statute.
“It is only a matter of time before the federal courts are drawn once more into the fray with the very real possibility that this change would be imposed immediately by judicial fiat — by far the most disruptive and damaging scenario I can imagine,” Gates said.
Still, the defense secretary also said the military would need some time to prepare for open service even after Congress repeals the statute. Gates noted that pending legislation before Congress would end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” only after he, the president and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that the U.S. military is ready for repeal.
“I believe it would be unwise to push ahead with full implementation of repeal before more can be done to prepare the force — in particular, those ground combat specialties and units for what could be a disruptive and disorientating change,” Gates said.
Gates said he doesn’t know how long it would take for the U.S. military to make the changes necessary before he can certify that open service can happen in the military. Still, Gates said if Congress enacts repeal, President Obama would be “watching very closely that we don’t dawdle or try to slow-ball this.”
“I think his expectation would be that we prepare as quickly as we properly and comprehensively could, and then we’d be in a position to move toward certification,” Gates said. “But how long it would take, I don’t know.”
For the first time, Gates also expressed his personal opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because the law comprises the integrity of gay service members.
“One of the things that is most important to me is personal integrity,” Gates said. “A policy or a law that in effect requires people to lie gives me a problem.”
Majority of troops don’t care about gays in military
The defense secretary made his remarks as part of his endorsement of the Pentagon report, which found little potential disruption in lifting the military’s gay ban should Congress repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Gates said the findings of the report “reflect nearly ten months of research and analysis along several lines of study” and “represent the most thorough and objective review ever of this difficult policy issue and its impact on the American military.”
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mike Mullen, who also took part in the news conference, said he also fully backs the report. Mullen has already testified before the Senate that supports open service in the U.S. military.
“For the first time, the chiefs and I have more than just anecdotal evidence and hearsay to inform the advice we give our civilian leaders,” Mullen said.
In the executive summary for the 256-page report, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” working group co-chairs Jeh Johnson, the Pentagon’s general counsel, and Army Gen. Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Army Europe, write that based on their findings, the risk of repeal “to overall military effectiveness is low.”
“We conclude that, while a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will likely, in the short term, bring about some limited and isolated disruption to unit cohesion and retention, we do not believe this disruption will be widespread or long-lasting, and can be adequately addressed by the recommendations we offer below,” Johnson and Ham write.
The report includes the results of a survey sent to 400,000 service members over the summer to solicit their views of gays serving openly in the military. According to the report, more than 115,000 of the surveys, or about 28 percent, were returned.
As earlier reported in November by the Washington Post, 70 percent of service members said alongside an openly gay person would have positive, mixed or no effect on their unit’s ability to get the job done.
The survey also found that 69 percent of respondents believe they have served alongside someone they believed to be gay. Of these respondents, 92 percent said their unit’s ability to work together was either very good, good or neither good nor poor.
Still, the survey found a significant minority who predicted negative consequences as a result of repeal — most notably in the Marine Corps.
While 30 percent of survey respondents overall had negative views on open service, around 40 to 60 percent of respondents in the Marine Corps and others in various combat arms specialties expressed concerns about serving alongside openly gay people.
During the briefing, Gates said this discontent with repeal among these groups has made the service chiefs of the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps “less sanguine” about the prospects on open service. Each of these service chiefs were set to testify on Friday before the Senate on the views on the report.
Still, Gates said the views on the combat troops on implementing open service “do not present an insurmountable barrier” to repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“However, these findings do lead me to conclude that an abundance of care and preparation is required if we are to avoid a disruptive and potentially dangerous impact on the performance of those serving at the tip of the spear in America’s wars,” Gates said.
Implementing open service
Accompanying the larger report is an 87-page support plan to guide implementation of open service in the U.S. military. The guide emphasizes that the key implementation message for successful repeal is “leadership-professionalism-respect.”
For leadership, the guide states that leaders in the chain of command must set the example for open service. For professionalism, the guide advises leaders to remind service members of their obligations and oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. For respect, the guide states that unit strength derives from treating other service members with respect.
The report also notably states the building separate rooming quarters for gay and straight service members won’t be appropriate for implementing open service.
“Building separate facilities would create divisions within units and inappropriately isolate a portion of the force,” the support plan states.
In March, former Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway has raised the idea of separate quarters when he said they might be necessary in his service as a result of open service. The Marine Corps is unique among other services because Marines bunk together on base in the same room.
Despite the recommendation against building separate quarters, Johnson said during the Tuesday news conference that commanding officers may be able to make different housing arrangements from service members as result of open service in some circumstances.
“We’re noting that commanders should retain the discretion on an individualized case-by-case basis to address concerns, particular concerns about privacy,” Johnson said. “And this is discretion they have right now. If a service member has a particular concern about an issue with privacy or can’t get along with someone with whom he’s been assigned a room, a commander has discretion to deal with that.”
The guide also makes recommendations for partner benefits for gays serving in the military. Ham said if “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is repealed, the U.S. military would only to continue to observe federally recognized marriages, which would be in accordance with the Defense of Marriage Act.
Still, Ham said a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would mean the same-sex partners of service members would be entitled to hospital visitation rights and death benefits.
“With regard to the hospital visits and death gratuities and the like, if the law is repealed, then we believe that are a number of benefits to which servicemembers are entitled that are servicemember-designated,” Ham said. “And we believe that the examples that you offer would likely fall into that category.”
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.
-
Photos5 days ago
PHOTOS: WorldPride Boat Parade
-
U.S. Supreme Court5 days ago
Activists rally for Andry Hernández Romero in front of Supreme Court
-
Real Estate4 days ago
The best U.S. cities for LGBTQ homebuyers in 2025
-
World Pride 20253 days ago
LGBTQ voices echo from the Lincoln Memorial at International Rally for Freedom