National
Obama still defending ‘Don’t Ask’ in court
Justice Dept. files brief with Ninth Circuit
The Obama administration is continuing to defend “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in court and on Friday filed a brief calling for suspension of litigation until the process for legislative repeal of the statute is complete.
In the case of Log Cabin v. United States, the U.S. Justice Department asked the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to hold off on proceedings until the president and Pentagon leaders complete the certification process for repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“The government believes the pendency of this repeal process warrants withholding further proceedings and decision in this matter until the process is complete,” the brief states.
In December, President Obama signed legislation allowing for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” But the military’s gay ban will remain in effect until the president, the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify the U.S. military is ready for an end to the military’s gay ban. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he won’t issue certification until training is implemented throughout the armed forces.
But should the appellate decide to continue with the case, the Justice Department argues that judges should reverse an earlier decision made by U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is unconstitutional. The administration contends the decision should be overturned because plaintiffs lack standing and the situation regarding the military’s gay ban has changed since the president signed legislation allowing for repeal.
“The district court exercised its equitable authority to enjoin enforcement of a federal statute, but that statute is now undergoing a repeal process subject to a more recent law duly enacted by Congress and signed by the president,” the brief states. “In view of the disruption that an abrupt and immediate end to [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] would cause … enacting this orderly process was well within Congress’s considerable constitutional authority in crafting legislation concerning military affairs.”
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of National Log Cabin Republicans, said Obama has “abdicated his responsibility” in ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” by continuing to defend the statute in court.
“The Department of Justice’s continued defense of this case and its appellate tactics seek to obfuscate the issues and facts of this case,” Cooper said. “Log Cabin Republicans represents countless Active Duty, Reserve and National Guard servicemembers who are under the peril of a policy that seeks to advance discrimination over national security, which is why we went to court to argue this exact matter.”
Tracy Schmaler, a Justice Department spokesperson, said administration is defending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as it traditionally does when acts of Congress are challenged in court.
“Congress has now enacted an orderly process for repeal of the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ policy and repeal is expected to become final in a matter of months,” she said.”In light of the vote to repeal this policy, we are working with the Department of Defense to take the appropriate steps in pending cases to conform with the law and the process established to repeal this policy.”
Dan Woods, attorney for White & Case LLP, who’s representing Log Cabin in the lawsuit, said the brief is “stunning” for what isn’t included and said administration attorneys are suggesting “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is unconstitutional.
“The government’s brief does not address the due process or First Amendment issues on which Judge Phillips based her decision nor the standard of review applicable to our challenge to the constitutionality of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,'” she said. “By not arguing merits of the constitutionality of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ the government’s brief, by its silence on these issues, is effectively conceding that ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was and is unconstitutional.”
The recent announcement from the Justice Department that it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court — based on the Obama administration’s new belief that laws related to sexual orientation deserve heightened scrutiny — raises questions about why the president continues to defend “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Prior to the filing on Friday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said he expected the brief to reiterate that “the courts should not decide the case or the constitutional question, due to the pending repeal, which should be effective in a matter of months.”
“As I said, the repeal is proceeding smoothly and efficiently,” Carney said. “Our goal was to have it repealed. It has been repealed. And that process of the repeal is now proceeding efficiently and smoothly, which is a good thing.”
Asked whether Obama has communicated to the Justice Department whether he thinks “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is unconstitutional, Carney replied, “Not that I know of.”
Download a copy of the Justice Department brief here.
The White House
Trump proclamation targets trans rights as State Dept. shifts visa policy
Recent policy actions from the White House limit transgender rights in sports, immigration visas, and overarching federal policy.
In a proclamation issued by the Trump White House Thursday night, the president said he would, among other things, “restore public safety” and continue “upholding the rule of law,” while promoting policies that restrict the rights of transgender people.
“We are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written, and ensuring colleges preserve — and, where possible, expand — scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes,” the proclamation reads. “At the same time, we are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”
The statement comes amid a broader series of actions by the Trump administration targeting transgender people across multiple federal policy areas, including education, health care, and immigration. A nearly complete list of policies the current administration has put forward can be found on KFF.org.
One day before the proclamation was issued, the U.S. State Department announced changes to visa regulations that could impact transgender and gender-nonconforming people seeking entry into the United States.
The policy, published March 11 and scheduled to take effect April 10, introduces changes to the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, commonly known as the “DV Program.” The rule is framed by the department as an effort to strengthen oversight and prevent fraud within the visa lottery system, which allocates a limited number of immigrant visas annually to applicants from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States.
However, the updated language also standardizes the use of the term “sex” in federal regulations in place of “gender,” a change that LGBTQ advocates say could create additional barriers for transgender and gender-diverse applicants.
The policy states: “The Department of State (‘Department’) is amending regulations governing the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program (‘DV Program’) to improve the integrity of, and combat fraud in, the program. These amendments require a petitioner to the DV Program to provide valid, unexpired passport information and to upload a scan of the biographic and signature page in the electronic entry form or otherwise indicate that he or she is exempt from this requirement. Additionally, the Department is standardizing and amending its regulations to add the word ‘shall’ to simplify guidance for consular officers; ensure the use of the term ‘sex’ in lieu of ‘gender’; and replace the term ‘age’ in the DV Program regulations with the phrase ‘date of birth’ to accurately reflect the information collected and maintained by the Department during the immigrant visa process.”
Advocates say the shift toward using “sex” rather than “gender” in federal immigration rules reflects a broader push by the administration to roll back recognition of transgender identities in federal policy.
According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, an estimated 15,000 to 50,000 undocumented transgender immigrants currently live in the United States, with many entering the country to seek refuge from persecution and hostile governments in their home countries.
Florida
Fla. House passes ‘Anti-Diversity’ bill
Measure could open door to overturning local LGBTQ rights protections
The Florida House of Representatives on March 10 voted 77-37 to approve an “Anti-Diversity in Local Government” bill that opponents have called an extreme and sweeping measure that, among other things, could overturn local LGBTQ rights protections.
The House vote came six days after the Florida Senate voted 25-11 to pass the same bill, opening the way to send it to Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, who supports the bill and has said he would sign it into law.
Equality Florida, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy organization that opposed the legislation, issued a statement saying the bill “would ban, repeal, and defund any local government programming, policy, or activity that provides ‘preferential treatment or special benefits’ or is designed or implemented with respect to race, color, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”
The statement added that the bill would also threaten city and county officials with removal from office “for activities vaguely labeled as DEI,” with only limited exceptions.
“Written in broad and ambiguous language, the bill is the most extreme of its kind in the country, creating confusion and fear for local governments that recognize LGBTQ residents and other communities that contribute to strength and vibrancy of Florida cities,” the group said in a separate statement released on March 10.
The Miami Herald reports that state Sen. Clay Yarborough (R-Jacksonville), the lead sponsor of the bill in the Senate, said he added language to the bill that would allow the city of Orlando to continue to support the Pulse nightclub memorial, a site honoring 49 mostly LGBTQ people killed in the 2016 mass shooting at the LGBTQ nightclub.
But the Equality Florida statement expresses concern that the bill can be used to target LGBTQ programs and protections.
“Debate over the bill made expressly clear that LGBTQ people were a central target of the legislation,” the group’s statement says. “The public record, the bill sponsors’ own statements, and hours of legislative debate revealed the animus driving the effort to pressure local governments into pulling back from recognizing or resourcing programs targeting LGBTQ residents and other historically marginalized communities,” the statement says.
But the statement also notes that following outspoken requests by local officials, sponsors of the bill agreed to several amendments “ensuring local governments can continue to permit Pride festivals, even while navigating new restrictions on supporting or promoting them.”
The statement adds, “Florida’s LGBTQ community knows all too well how to fight back against unjust laws. Just as we did, following the passage of Florida’s notorious ‘Don’t Say Gay or Trans’ law, we will fight every step of the way to limit the impact of this legislation, including in the courts.”
The White House
Trump will refuse to sign voting bill without anti-trans provisions
Measure described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
President Donald Trump said he will refuse to sign any legislation into law unless Congress passes the “SAVE Act,” pressuring lawmakers to move forward with the controversial voting bill.
In posts on Truth Social and other social media platforms, the 47th president emphasized the importance of Republican lawmakers pushing the legislation through while also using the opportunity to denounce gender-affirming care.
“I, as President, will not sign other Bills until this is passed, AND NOT THE WATERED DOWN VERSION — GO FOR THE GOLD,” Trump posted. “MUST SHOW VOTER I.D. & PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP: NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS EXCEPT FOR MILITARY — ILLNESS, DISABILITY, TRAVEL: NO MEN IN WOMEN’S SPORTS: NO TRANSGENDER MUTILIZATION FOR CHILDREN! DO NOT FAIL!!!”
The proposed Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections. Trump has also called for the legislation to include a ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent.
“This is a huge priority for the president. He added on some priorities to the SAVE America Act in recent days, namely, no transgender transition surgeries for minors. We are not gonna tolerate the mutilation of young children in this country. No men in women’s sports,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said. “The president putting all of these priorities together speaks to how common sense they are.”
The comments mark the first time the White House has publicly confirmed that Trump is pushing to attach anti-trans policies to the SAVE Act.
The bill would also require the removal of undocumented immigrants from existing voter rolls and allow election officials who fail to enforce the proof-of-citizenship requirement to be sued.
It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. Current safeguards include requirements such as providing a Social Security number when registering to vote, cross-checking voter rolls with federal data and, in some states, requiring identification at the polls.
Trump began pushing for the legislation during his State of the Union address last month, where he singled out Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) by name while criticizing the lack of movement on the bill.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has denounced the legislation as “Jim Crow 2.0” and said it has little chance of advancing through the Senate, calling it “dead on arrival.”
In remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer said “the SAVE Act includes such extreme voter registration requirements that, if enacted, could disenfranchise 21 million American citizens.”
Trump has repeatedly used political messaging around trans youth and gender-affirming care as part of broader cultural and policy debates during his presidency — most recently during his State of the Union address, where he cited the case of Sage Blair, a Virginia teenager whose school allegedly encouraged her to transition without her parents’ consent.
LGBTQ advocates — including those familiar with Blair’s story — say the situation was far more complex than described and argue that using a single anecdote to justify sweeping federal restrictions could place trans people, particularly youth, at greater risk.
-
Health4 days agoToo afraid to leave home: ICE’s toll on Latino HIV care
-
Movies5 days agoIntense doc offers transcendent treatment of queer fetish pioneer
-
Colombia4 days agoClaudia López wins primary in Colombian presidential race
-
The White House3 days agoTrump will refuse to sign voting bill without anti-trans provisions

