National
Deportations on hold for foreigners in same-sex marriages
News follows Obama’s determination that DOMA is unconstitutional
An agency within the Department of Homeland Security has put on hold deportation cases for foreign nationals who are in same-sex marriages with American citizens and seeking green cards for U.S. citizenship.
In a statement, Chris Bentley, a spokesperson for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, confirmed on Monday that such cases have put on abeyance until the Department of Homeland Security receives further legal guidance on handling them.
“USCIS has issued guidance to the field asking that related cases be held in abeyance while awaiting final guidance related to distinct issues,” Bentley said.
Last week, Newsweek reported that the heads of two USCIS districts in D.C. and Baltimore had informed lawyers for the American Immigration Lawyers Association that cases in their districts involving married gay and lesbian couples would be put on hold.
A DHS official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the abeyance follows President Obama’s determination in February that the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, is unconstitutional and the U.S. Justice Department announcement that it would no longer defense the anti-gay statute against litigation in court.
Because of DOMA, American citizens who are married to foreign spouses of the same gender cannot sponsor their spouses for U.S. citizenship — even if the couple lives in a state or jurisdiction that recognizes same-sex marriage.
Despite the new guidance, Bentley maintained USCIS hasn’t issued any change in policy and intends to continue enforcement of DOMA.
“USCIS has not implemented any change in policy and intends to follow the President’s directive to continue enforcing the law,” Bentley said.
Asked what the possible outcomes could be for the upcoming legal guidance, the DHS official replied, “All I can say is that the department’s policy direction is set by the president, but as a matter of policy we don’t comment on legal guidance until it’s final.”
The final legal guidance on the issue is expected to come down from the Department of Homeland Security’s general counsel. The DHS official said he’s hoping the guidance will be issued “imminently,” but doesn’t have a more specific time.
Steve Ralls, spokesperson for Immigration Equality, said the abeyance means that green cards applications that American citizens make for foreign same-sex spouses will be in “pending status” until the courts make a final determination on DOMA’s constitutionality.
Steve Ralls of Immigration Equality (Blade photo by Michael Key)
“So they will not be denied, and while they are pending, the spouses of those that have applied for sponsorship will be able to remain in the thread, so it essentially stops the removal of anyone who has a pending application until the courts have settled the issue of DOMA’s constitutionality,” Ralls said. “It’s a temporary fix, but it’s a temporary fix that will remain in place until DOMA has made its way through the court system.”
In a statement, Rachel Tiven, executive director for Immigration Equality, called the new guidance “terrific news and a significant step forward for the families we work with.”
Earlier this month, Immigration Equality sent letters to the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security asking that the Obama administration put on hold the appeals of immigrant visa petitions filed by American citizens on behalf of their same-sex spouses.
“At last, after nearly two decades of work and 10,000 — and counting — couples reaching out to our legal team for help, we hope today’s news is a sign that relief is, indeed, on the way,” Tiven said.
Tiven advised couples who think they may be impacted by the announcement to contact Immigration Equality for free legal counsel on what steps would be appropriate for them.
Ralls added the number of couples who will benefit from the abeyance will in the end depend on the breadth of the ruling from the courts on DOMA.
“So it depends on whether the courts decide that both federal and state DOMAs are unconstitutional or whether just the federal DOMA is unconstitutional, so there are sort of a wide variety of possibilities in terms of who the final resolution will benefit,” Ralls said.
If the federal DOMA is struck down, Ralls noted that married bi-national same-sex couples would have the option of moving to jurisdictions that recognize marriage equality to remain together in the United States.
Christopher Nugent, who’s gay and co-chair of the American Bar Association’s rights of immigrants committee, called the news a “positive development to protect couples from unduly separated through deportation,” but said questions linger on how the immigration courts will handle the news guidance.
“For example, if somebody has already been ordered removed and then marries a U.S. citizen, is the immigration court going to grant a motion to reopen?” Nugent said.
One couple that the USCIS move could benefit is Edwin Blesch, an American citizen, and Tim Smulian, his South African spouse. The couple resides in New York state, where their marriage from South Africa is recognized by the state government. Last week, Immigration Equality filed a green card application on behalf the couple.
“Every day, we live with the very real possibility that, despite following every law and every policy of the United States, Tim will be forced to leave the country, and I will be left without my caretaker and the love of my life,” Blesch said in a statement. “Today’s news gives us great relief, and great hope that we may soon be able to put that worry behind us. For the first time, we can begin to plan the rest of our lives together without fear that we will be torn apart.”
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.
PHOTOS: Helen Hayes Awards
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
WorldPride events round-up
Pope Leo XIV: Family based on ‘stable union between a man and a woman’
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
