Connect with us

National

Service chiefs hold mixed views on ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal

Military leaders each express concerns, but confidence in ability to implement

Published

on

The military service chiefsĀ offered mixedĀ views on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal during SenateĀ testimony on Thursday as they said they had concerns about ending the law, but could implement a change ifĀ ordered.

Two the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff —Ā Vice Chair Gen. James CartwrightĀ andĀ Chief ofĀ Naval Operations Adm. Gary RougheadĀ —Ā testified before the Senate Armed Services CommitteeĀ that Congress shouldĀ act to repealĀ “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”Ā 

Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp —Ā not aĀ member of the JointĀ Chiefs but a witness atĀ the hearing —Ā alsoĀ endorsed open service.

In comparison to the other service chiefs, Cartwright offeredĀ aĀ particularly strong statementĀ encouragingĀ Congress to take action toĀ lift “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“My faith in our leadership, from top to bottom, the fair-minded temperament of the American public, and the reputational benefit derived from being a force identified by honesty and inclusivity, rather than concealment causes me to favor repeal of 10 USC 654 and the associated policy known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,'” Cartwright said.

But ArmyĀ Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey and Marine Corps Gen. Commandant James Amos spoke outĀ against legislative efforts to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz said heĀ wanted full implementationĀ ofĀ repeal deferred until 2012.Ā 

Amos, who has previously spoken out against repeal, said he hadĀ concernĀ over “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal because of several reasons,Ā includingĀ combat operations abroad.

“Based on what I know about the very tough fight on the ground in Afghanistan, the almost singular focus of our combat forces as they train up and deploy into theater, the necessary tightly woven culture of those combat forces that we are asking so much of at this time, and finally the direct feedback from the survey, my recommendation is that we should not implement repeal at this time,” Amos said.

The hearing marked the second day in a two-day series of hearings on the Pentagon’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” report, which was made public earlier this week. During the previous hearing, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen reiterated his belief that gays should be able to serve openly in the U.S. military.

Repeal advocatesĀ had been awaiting statements from the service chiefs on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” following the release of the Pentagon report. In May, the service chiefs of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps sentĀ a letter to Congress urging lawmakers not to take action until the study was complete.

While the service chiefs had differing views on whether Congress should act to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” they each expressed concerns to some degree on the implementation of open service.

Roughead expressed unease about how the Pentagon report showedĀ that sailorsĀ in irregular warfare specialties,Ā such as the Navy SEALS,Ā expressed greater negativity over the prospects of repeal and a lower propensity to reenlistĀ than other sailors.

“While these effects may not be fully realized, these specialties must be monitored closely to ensure we are positioned and resourced to respond to changes over the long-term,” Roughead said. “We cannot assume these projected retention losses away and we must take into account the past, current and future combat employment of these combat specialties.”

But even the service chiefs who said they opposed repeal expressed confidence in their branch’s ability to implement a change if ordered by Congress.

Casey said if open service in the U.S. military is properly implemented, he doesn’t envision it would prevent the Army from accomplishing its worldwide missions.

“We have a disciplined force and seasoned leaders, who, with appropriate guidance and direction, can oversee the implementation of the repeal with moderate risk to our military effectiveness in the short-term, and moderate risk to our ability to recruit and retain our all-volunteer force over time,” Casey said.

Members of the committee had different interpretations for what the testimony of the service chiefs means for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in the lame duck session of Congress.

McCainĀ said the differing opinions of the service chiefs demonstrates the need to hold off on legislative action on ending the military’s gay ban.

“I think it’s pretty obvious from the comments made by certainly the chiefs of staff — the service chiefs of the Army, Navy, Air Force andĀ Marine Corps today that thereĀ isĀ significantly divided opinion on thisĀ issue,” McCain said. “It’s veryĀ obvious to me that there is a lot more scrutiny and work involved before passing this legislation.”

McCain said he wants to hear from the senior enlistedĀ personnel who would be trainingĀ service membersĀ on the implementationĀ of open service as well as combatant commandersĀ before Congress takes action.

But Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the sponsor of repeal legislation in the Senate, noted the chiefs each expressed confidence thatĀ they couldĀ faithfully execute aĀ new policy if given time to implement a change.

“My conclusion is that really, in the end, all six of you favor repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,'” Lieberman said.

Observing the service chiefs concerns about implementation, Lieberman noted that repeal legislation pending before the Senate requires the president, the defense secretary andĀ the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to certify that the military is readyĀ for open service before repeal is fully implemented.

The senator noted Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he wouldn’t certify open service until he felt the service chiefs were comfortable with moving forward. Asked by Lieberman whether they were assuaged by this statement, each of the service chiefs said they comfortable with Gates’ decision on when open service could be implemented.

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), a strong proponent of repeal, similarly brought out favorable responses for repeal from the service chiefs when he asked each of them if they were comfortable with the certification process and with their ability to implement repeal.

Each of the chiefs said they had confidence in Gates’ decision and their service’s ability to execute the change in law.

“I believe we can implement the policy and will implement the policy with moderate risk to our short-term effectiveness and long-term health of the force,” Casey said.

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said he thought the testimony from the service chiefs “actually went better” than whatĀ he had expected.

“I think what it really brought out was the point that although the service chiefs and many people may have differing opinions on what they want to happen and varying ways in which they would like to see it go about happening,” Nicholson said. “In the end, they seem to all agree that it’s possible to make it happen and make it happen in a safe and smooth way.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

GLAAD catalogues LGBTQ-inclusive pages on White House and federal agency websites

Trump-Vance administration to take office Monday

Published

on

World AIDS Day 2023 at the White House (Washington Blade Photo by Michael Key)

GLAAD has identified and catalogued LGBTQ-inclusive content or references to HIV that appear on WhiteHouse.gov and the websites for several federal government agencies, anticipating that these pages might be deleted, archived, or otherwise changed shortly after the incoming administration takes over on Monday.

The organization found a total of 54 links on WhiteHouse.gov and provided the Washington Blade with a non-exhaustive list of the “major pages” on websites for the Departments of Defense (12), Justice (three), State (12), Education (15), Health and Human Services (10), and Labor (14), along with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (10).

The White House web pages compiled by GLAAD range from the transcript of a seven-minute speech delivered by President Joe Biden to mark the opening of the Stonewall National Monument Visitor Center to a readout of a roundtable with leaders in the LGBTQ and gun violence prevention movements and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy’s 338-page FY2024 budget summary, which contains at least a dozen references to LGBTQ-focused health equity initiatives and programs administered by agencies like the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Just days after Trump took office in his first term, news outlets reported that LGBTQ related content had disappeared from WhiteHouse.gov and websites for multiple federal agencies.

Chad Griffin, who was then president of the Human Rights Campaign, accused the Trump-Pence administration of “systematically scrubbing the progress made for LGBTQ people from official websites,” raising specific objection to the State Department’s removal of an official apology for the Lavender Scare by the outgoing secretary, John Kerry, in January 2017.

Acknowledging the harm caused by the department’s dismissal of at least 1,000 employees for suspected homosexuality during the 1950s and 60s “set the right tone for the State Department, he said, adding, ā€œIt is outrageous that the new administration would attempt to erase from the record this historic apology for witch hunts that destroyed the lives of innocent Americans.”

In response to an inquiry from NBC News into why LGBTQ content was removed and whether the pages would return, a spokesperson said “As per standard practice, the secretary’s remarks have been archived.” However, NBC noted that “a search of the State Department’s website reveals not much else has changed.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Appeals court hears case challenging Florida’s trans healthcare ban

District court judge concluded the law was discriminatory, unconstitutional

Published

on

NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Parties in Doe v. Ladapo, a case challenging Florida’s ban on healthcare for transgender youth and restrictions on the medical interventions available to trans adults, presented oral arguments on Wednesday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta.

The case was appealed by defendants representing the Sunshine State following a decision in June 2024 by Judge Robert Hinkle of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, who found “the law and rules unconstitutional and unenforceable on equal protection grounds,” according to a press release from the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is involved in the litigation on behalf of the plaintiffs.

The district court additionally found the Florida healthcare ban unconstitutional on the grounds that it was “motivated by purposeful discrimination against transgender people,” though the ban and restrictions will remain in effect pending a decision by the appellate court.

Joining NCLR in the lawsuit are attorneys from GLAD Law, the Human Rights Campaign, Southern Legal Counsel, and the law firms Lowenstein Sandler and Jenner and Block.

“As a mother who simply wants to protect and love my child for who she is, I pray that the Eleventh Circuit will affirm the district courtā€™s thoughtful and powerful order, restoring access to critical healthcare for all transgender Floridians,” plaintiff Jane Doe said. “No one should have to go through what my family has experienced.ā€

“As a transgender adult just trying to live my life and care for my family, it is so demeaning that the state of Florida thinks itā€™s their place to dictate my healthcare decisions,” said plaintiff Lucien Hamel.

“Members of the legislature have referred to the high quality healthcare I have received, which has allowed me to live authentically as myself, as ā€˜mutilationā€™ and ā€˜an abominationā€™ and have called the providers of this care ā€˜evil,ā€™” Hamel added. “We hope the appellate court sees these rules and laws for what truly are: cruel.ā€ 

ā€œTransgender adults donā€™t need state officials looking over their shoulders, and families of transgender youth donā€™t need the government dictating how to raise their children,ā€ said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. ā€œThe district court heard the evidence and found that these restrictions are based on bias, not science. The court of appeals should affirm that judgment.ā€ 

Noting Hinkle’s conclusion that the ban and restrictions were “motivated by animus, not science or evidence,” Simone Chris, who leads Southern Legal Counsel’s Transgender Rights Initiative, said, ā€œThe state has loudly and proudly enacted bans on transgender people accessing healthcare, using bathrooms, transgender teachers using their pronouns and titles, and a slough of other actions making it nearly impossible for transgender individuals to live in this state.”

Lowenstein Sandler Partner Thomas Redburn said, ā€œThe defendants have offered nothing on appeal that could serve as a valid basis for overturning that finding” by the district court.

 ā€œNot only does this dangerous law take away parentsā€™ freedom to make responsible medical decisions for their child, it inserts the government into private health care matters that should be between adults and their providers,” said Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law.

Continue Reading

State Department

LGBTQ rights abroad not discussed during Marco Rubio confirmation hearing

Senate expected to confirm Fla. Republican as next secretary of state

Published

on

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) during his confirmation hearing to become the next secretary of state on Jan. 15, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Wednesday did not speak about LGBTQ rights abroad during his confirmation hearing to become the next secretary of state.

The Florida Republican in his opening statement to the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee noted President-elect Donald Trump “returns to office with an unmistakable mandate from the voters.”

“They want a strong America, a strong America engaged in the world, but guided by a clear objective to promote peace abroad and security and prosperity here at home,” said Rubio.

“The direction he has given for the conduct of our foreign policy is clear,” he added. “Every dollar we spend, every program we fund, and every policy we pursue must be justified with the answer to three simple questions: Does it make America safer? Does it make America stronger? Does it make America more prosperous?”

Trump nominated Rubio a week after Vice President Kamala Harris conceded she lost the presidential election.

Rubio in 2022Ā defendedĀ Florida’s ā€œDonā€™t Say Gayā€ law that Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed. The Florida Republican that year also voted against the Respect for Marriage Act that passed with bipartisan support.

LGBTQ rights a cornerstone of Biden-Harris administration’s foreign policy

President Joe Biden in February 2021Ā signed a memo that committed the U.S. to promoting LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad as part of his administrationā€™s overall foreign policy. A few months later he named Jessica Stern, the former executive director of Outright International, a global advocacy group, as special U.S. envoy for the promotion of LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad.

Ned Price, who was the State Departmentā€™s first openly gay spokesperson, during a May 2021 interview with the Washington Blade noted the decriminalization of consensual same-sex sexual relations was one of the administrationā€™s priorities in its efforts to promote LGBTQ rights abroad.

Trump during his first administration tapped then-U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell, who has been tapped as special missions envoy, to lead an initiative that encouraged countries to decriminalize homosexuality. Activists with whom the Blade has previously spoken questioned whether this effort had any tangible results.

Stern in 2022 noted the Biden-Harris administration also supported marriage equality efforts in countries where activists said they were possible through legislation or the judicial process.

Brittney Griner in December 2022 returned to the U.S. after Russia released her in exchange for a convicted arms dealer. The lesbian WNBA star had been serving a nine-year prison sentence in a penal colony after a court earlier that year convicted her on the importation of illegal drugs after Russian customs officials found vape canisters containing cannabis oil in her luggage at Moscowā€™s Sheremetyevo Airport.

The State Department in 2022 began to issue passports with an ā€œXā€ gender marker.

The Biden-Harris administration in response to the signing of Ugandaā€™s Anti-Homosexuality Act sanctioned officials and removed the country from a program that allows sub-Saharan African countries to trade duty-free the U.S. Harris during a 2023 press conference with then-Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo in Accra, the Ghanaian capital, spoke about LGBTQ rights.

Chantale Wong, the U.S. director of the Asian Development Bank, in 2022 became the first openly lesbian woman ambassador. David Pressman, the outgoing U.S. ambassador to Hungary, and Scott Miller, the outgoing U.S. ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, are two of the other American ambassadors who Biden nominated that are gay.

Outgoing Secretary of State Antony Blinken in 2021 appointed former U.S. Ambassador to Malta Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley as the State Department’s first chief diversity and inclusion officer.

U.S. Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), who chairs the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, criticized the State Department’s DEI efforts during Rubio’s confirmation hearing.

“The Biden administration often undercut effective foreign policy by inserting ideological and political requirements into the fabric of personnel decisions and policy execution,” said Risch.

“Rather than making hires or promotions based on merit and effectiveness, the department created new diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) requirements that distracted from this mission, undermined morale, and created an unfair and opaque process for promotions and performance evaluations,” he added. “Fealty to progressive politics became the benchmark for success. As we look around the United States that view is diminishing very quickly amongst even large progressive cooperations.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular