National

Obama still defending ‘Don’t Ask’ in court

Justice Dept. files brief with Ninth Circuit

Published

16 years ago

February 26, 2011

Chris Johnson

President Obama (Blade photo by Michael Key)

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.

Up Next

Boehner: House likely to intervene to defend DOMA

Don't Miss

Gingrich wants House to retaliate against Obama over DOMA

FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM

National

Man charged in Mall of America shooting plot inspired by Pulse massacre: report

Suspect exchanged hundreds of messages, pledged loyalty to ISIS

Published

3 days ago

October 8, 2026

Margaret Hetherman

The U.S. Department of Justice charged Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud with planning a crime of terrorism.

The U.S. Department of Justice charged Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud, 18, of Richfield, Minn., on Oct. 7 with one count of knowingly receiving a firearm and ammunition in order to commit a federal crime of terrorism. Mohamud allegedly planned to carry out a mass-casualty attack in support of ISIS, inspired in part by the Pulse nightclub massacre that took place on June 12, 2016 when then-29-year-old Omar Mateen murdered 49 people and wounded 58 – one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history, and the deadliest targeting the LGBTQ+ community.

According to a DOJ statement release, Mohamud was arrested on Oct. 6 by the FBI, which had arranged to sell him an AK-47 assault rifle, magazines, and ammunition through an undercover FBI employee. Mohamud was arrested shortly after paying $600 in cash and taking possession of those items; he reaffirmed his intention to shoot people at the Mall of America during the transaction.

“Mohamud allegedly sought to carry out a mass-casualty shooting at the Mall of America, expressing a desire to emulate some of the most horrific ISIS-inspired attacks in the United States, including the atrocities at Pulse Nightclub and 2025 New Year’s Day attack in New Orleans,” said Assistant Attorney General for National Security John A. Eisenberg in the statement by the DOJ. “The National Security Division will continue to work closely with the FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Force to track down and prosecute ISIS-inspired terrorists in the United States.”

According to the complaint, beginning on or about December 2024, Mohamud had exchanged hundreds of messages through multiple social media and messaging apps with a confidential source, and expressed a desire to travel to Somalia to join a designated foreign terrorist organization to fight on their behalf.

The defendant stated many times that if he was unable to travel overseas because of a lack of funds, he planned to carry out a mass-casualty event in Minnesota in support of ISIS.

According to the DOJ, “In July 2026, Mohamud sent messages discussing his intent to carry out a mass-casualty shooting attack at the Mall of America because he claimed it was owned by Jews. He wrote that [he] wanted to kill 30 to 60 people so no one would go there.”

“During the course of his communications, Mohamud stated that he wanted to commit an attack similar to those of the Pulse Nightclub mass-shooting in Orlando, the Bondi Beach mass-shooting in Australia, and the New Year’s Day vehicle-ramming attack in New Orleans.”

This case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Ryan White of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Benjamin Bejar for the District of Minnesota.

California

Calif. GOP gubernatorial candidate ad ‘disgusting attempt to exploit lesbian intimacy’

Activists, anti-LGBTQ religious leaders criticized Steve Hilton spot

Published

3 days ago

October 8, 2026

Caleb Kaufman

(Screenshot of Steven Hilton ad)

Two women sit on a bed, a Pride flag hanging behind them. One is nervous; the other tells her to be calm and that she’ll do “all the work.” The music swells. The two hold hands and — fill out a ballot voting for Steve Hilton?

This is the new advertisement from the Hilton gubernatorial campaign that is drawing rebuke from both sides of the aisle, but for very different reasons.

Jorge Reyes Salinas, the communications director at Equality California, said the ad was an insult to the queer community.

“This ad is a disgusting attempt to exploit lesbian intimacy for political attention,” he said. The advertisement plays on media tropes that Salinas says “reduce lesbian and bisexual women … to sexual entertainment,” rather than showing them as well-rounded characters. “Any group of the LGBTQ+ community deserves the same dignity and respect as everyone else,” he said.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Caleb Kaufman (@caleb_kaufman_photography)

The ad is truly hyper-sexualized. It ends with one woman telling the other, “Now lick it.” The two pause and stare before she reveals an envelope to send the ballot, and large text pops up saying, “Just try it!”

Salinas characterized the ad as a desperate attempt to get attention from a candidate who is trailing far behind in the polls in heavily Democratic California. The Democratic candidate Xavier Becerra, who is endorsed by Equality California, holds a 25-point lead over Hilton according to recent polling by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies.

Conservatives have also criticized the ad.

Influential evangelical Pastor Jack Hibbs thought the ad was distasteful and said, “lesbianism among college girls and some high school girls that right now is an actual pandemic of social ill.” Republican attorney general candidate Michael Gates said it undermines “the sanctity of the relationship between parents and their children.” This criticism is rather confusing because although the ad features two relatively young women, they both appear to be adults, not minors.

“The comments from Pastor Jack Hibbs should be criticized because there is nothing wrong with two women being attracted to each other,” Salinas said. “We’re calling out the ad’s stereotypes, while also rejecting the homophobia in the response to it … by other Republicans.”

The backlash from Hilton’s own party and supporters shows that an advertisement full of queer innuendo was ill-considered, considering the national GOP’s attacks on LGBTQ people in recent years. Hilton himself has been campaigning against transgender girls and women competing in school sports and using locker rooms that correspond with their gender identity. This context might be why Hilton’s political base responded to the ad just as poorly as the liberal voters he was attempting to court.

Hilton says the ad is part of a new series rolling out before Election Day, showing stereotypical California liberal archetypes voting for Hilton. He claims these ads are authentically filmed with real actors, as opposed to being A.I. generated, like many of his previous ads. One other advertisement has been released so far by the campaign showing a man at a spiritual retreat also being swayed to vote for Hilton, although it is notably absent of sexual innuendo.

Caleb Kaufman is a California Local News Fellow placed with the Los Angeles Blade. The California Local News Fellowship is a state-funded initiative to support and strengthen local news reporting. Learn more about it at fellowships.journalism.berkeley.edu/cafellows.

2026 Midterm Elections

Trump uses anti-trans slur against Democratic Senate candidate

President mocked Annie Andrews

Published

3 days ago

October 7, 2026

Joe Reberkenny

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trump used an anti-trans slur against Democratic South Carolina Senate candidate Annie Andrews on Monday as he sought to rally support for Republicans in the state’s Senate race.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump attacked Andrews three times, referring to her as “trannie” while promoting U.S. Sen. Darline Graham (R-S.C.)’s campaign.

Andrews is running against Graham for a Senate seat in the solidly Republican state.

Earlier this year, Graham was specially appointed to the seat following the death of her brother, Lindsey Graham, who represented South Carolina in the Senate from 2003 to 2026.

Andrews, the Democratic nominee from the state, is a pediatrician that lives in Charleston with her three children. She told NBC News that she will “work with anyone to put South Carolina first.”

“As a mom and a pediatrician, I’m in this race to fight for my patients, my three kids, and South Carolina,” Andrews said, adding that “lowering costs and making life better for families across our state is going to take all of us working together.”

Andrews used the attention from the president’s attack to emphasize what she described as a focus on policy issues rather than the culture wars that have dominated much of the political debate.

“If you care more about your bills than the politics in Washington, this campaign is for you,” she added.

Trump’s remarks have drawn criticism from leaders on both sides of the aisle.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) condemned Trump’s words Monday night on social media, calling his attacks on Andrews “despicable.”

“Annie Andrews is a mom and pediatrician who’s always put her community first — and she’s exactly who South Carolina needs representing them in the Senate,” Schumer said on X.

Former South Carolina Gov. David Beasley, a Republican, also criticized the president’s attack on Andrews, urging voters to “reject politics based on division and hate.”

“This is abhorrent. Elections don’t have to be about cruelty and lies. South Carolina deserves better,” Beasley wrote Monday night on X.

South Carolina has not elected a Democratic senator in nearly three decades.

Andrews’s campaign website does not mention her positions on LGBTQ issues.

The Washington Blade reached out to Andrews’s campaign for comment on Trump’s attack and her positions on transgender rights but did not hear back by time of publication.