National
Carney mum on executive orders against LGBT bias
Directives could provide protections in workplace and U.S. military

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was mum on Monday when asked whether President Obama would be open to issuing executive orders that would provide non-discrimination protections for LGBT people in the workplace and U.S. armed forces.
Under questioning from the Washington Blade, Carney said he wouldn’t venture out to say if Obama would be open to issuing a directive barring the federal government from contracting with companies that don’t have non-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Such an order would offer similar protections that have been proposed under the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
“I don’t want to speculate about what action he may or may not take,” Carney said. “His position is known. And again, he does not shy away from obstacles when he approaches an issue that’s important to him. But I don’t have a — I’m not going to speculate about what measure he might take.”
Passage of ENDA with protections based on both sexual orientation and gender identity was among Obama’s promises in the 2008 presidential campaign. However, the legislation failed to move during the 111th Congress, and Republican control of the House makes ENDA passage unlikely for at least two years.
An executive order has been seen as an interim alternative to ENDA passage, although the directive would have more limited protections because it would only directly impact employers that contract with the U.S. government. Last week in an interview with the Blade, gay Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) endorsed the order and said it would “show a lot of courage on behalf of the administration and demonstrate that they’re committed to moving to a discrimination-free workplace environment.”
Similarly, Carney had few words when asked whether Obama would be open to an executive order that would ensure LGBT service members have legal recourse if, after repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” they feel they’ve experienced discrimination in the U.S. military.
“Again, I don’t have — I don’t want to say what he may or may not be open to,” Carney said. “What I do know is that repeal is going along on schedule and successfully, and he is very closely monitoring that. And — but more than that I do not have.”
The repeal legislation that Obama signed in December would lift “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” from the federal code, but puts nothing in its place that would ensure gay service members have protections against discrimination.
Gay rights supporters have been calling on President Obama to issue an executive order that would provide explicit protections for gay service members who feel they’ve experienced discrimination in the armed forces. The White House hasn’t explicitly endorsed or rejected the idea, but has noted Pentagon policy guidance stating that harassment or abuse based on sexual orientation would be unacceptable in the military.
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has called on Obama to issue an executive order with protections both on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Troops who disclose they are transgender are separated from the military as a medical discharge under military regulation.
Pressed on whether any impediment — legal, political or otherwise — is blocking the president from issuing either order, Carney declined to identify anything that’s preventing the president from taking these actions.
“Those kinds of questions about legal impediments are best addressed to lawyers, and I am not one,” Carney said.
A partial transcript of the exchange between the Blade and Carney follows:
Washington Blade: Jay, three questions. One of the president’s goals has been passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which bar job discrimination against gay and transgender Americans. That’s going to be a challenge with Republicans in control of the House.
One idea that’s being proposed as an interim alternative is an executive order that would bar the federal government from doing business with companies that don’t have their workplace protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Would the president be open to issuing this executive order?
Jay Carney: Well, I don’t want to speculate about what action he may or may not take. His position is known. And again, he does not shy away from obstacles when he approaches an issue that’s important to him. But I don’t have a — I’m not going to speculate about what measure he might take.
Blade: In a similar vein, as we move forward with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, is the president open to issuing an executive order to ensure that LGBT service members have legal recourse if they feel they’ve experienced discrimination in the U.S. military?
Carney: Again, I don’t have — I don’t want to say what he may or may not be open to. What I do know is that repeal is going along on schedule and successfully, and he is very closely monitoring that. And — but more than that I do not have.
Blade: But do you see any impediment — legal, political or otherwise — that would prevent the president from issuing either of these executive orders?
Carney: Those kinds of questions about legal impediments are best addressed to lawyers, and I am not one.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.
In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”
In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.
The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.
“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.
He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”
“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”
Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”
Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.
Federal Government
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”
The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.
“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”
Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”
Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”
“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”
Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.
Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.
The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”
-
U.S. Supreme Court3 days ago
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
-
Out & About3 days ago
Celebrate the Fourth of July the gay way!
-
Virginia3 days ago
Va. court allows conversion therapy despite law banning it
-
Federal Government5 days ago
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House