National
House defense committee to vote on anti-gay amendments
Measures would disrupt ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal, prevent same-sex marriages on bases
Amendments that could disrupt “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and mandate that marriages on military bases comply with the Defense of Marriage Act are set to see votes on Wednesday when a House defense panel takes up major Pentagon budget legislation.
Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), a Marine Corps veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and opponent of gays in the military, plans to introduce an amendment aimed at derailing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal by expanding the certification requirement to include input from the four military service chiefs.
In a statement Monday, Hunter announced he would introduce the amendment to expand the certification requirement during the House Armed Services Committee’s markup of the fiscal year 2012 defense authorization bill. The measure would interfere with the repeal law that President Obama signed in December, which allows for implementation of open service after 60 days pass following certification from the president, the defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“The four military service chiefs are far more closely connected to the day-to-day realities facing each respective service branch than those who are currently required to sign off on the repeal — including the president,” said Hunter said. “The president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs should all take part in the certification process, but excluding the service chiefs is a mistake.”
Hunter, who introduced standalone legislation earlier this year mirroring the planned amendment, added the military service chiefs may agree to enact repeal at the same time as the president, the defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or they “may have other recommendations for implementation and timing.”
The Hunter amendment could be one among several amendments that could be introduced by opponents of gays in the military to disrupt the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal process. Informed sources said other measures could be an outright abrogation of the repeal measure that Congress passed and Obama signed last year as opposed to merely implementing a certification expansion.
Involving the military service chiefs in the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal certification process could disrupt or delay open service in the U.S. military because some uniform leaders of the military — notably Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos — expressed opposition to passing repeal legislation last year. Amos has since said the Marine Corps would work to implement open service.
Despite the qualms that were expressed last year, each of the service chiefs testified in April that the process for enacting “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal has been proceeding smoothly. Some service chiefs — including Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead — have said they oppose any effort to expand the certification requirement and they believe the defense secretary would adequately represent their views in the certification process.
Fred Sainz, vice president of communications for the Human Rights Campaign, said he thinks the Hunter amendment is an attempt at a “do over strategy” because Republicans didn’t get what they wanted when the last Congress passed legislation allowing for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.
“It just seems like they didn’t like the outcome, so now they’re trying to get another bite at the apple,” Sainz said.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, said those who worked for legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” plan to send a letter in opposition to the Hunter measure and similar amendments before the committee markup.
“We’re simply going to members of the House Armed Services Committee saying don’t allow or take into consideration amendments that would be anything seen as repealing repeal,” Cooper said.
Despite efforts from advocates, if the Hunter amendment is supported in committee along party lines, the measure would likely pass because Republicans enjoy a majority on the panel by a margin of 35-27. After the defense authorization bill is reported to the House floor, a similar vote of approval could be expected on the House floor because Republican have control of the chamber. The bill could see a House floor vote as early as the week of May 23.
Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said he fears the committee has sufficient votes to pass Hunter’s amendment.
“The reality is if the majority in the chamber want to move that amendment they can adopt it successfully,” Sarvis said.
But Cooper said he doesn’t think the support is present in committee to approve the Hunter amendment because defense officials have said the current repeal process is working.
“I don’t think the votes are there,” Cooper said. “I think it would be pretty short-sighted for some of those folks to actually take a vote on something that has had such positive reporting from the [Defense] Department.”
Even if House Republicans are successful in approving the expanded certification measure as part of their defense authorization bill, passing such a provision into law would be challenging because the Senate would agree to it during conference negotiations and Obama would have to sign the measure.
Further, defense officials have testified that certification could happen mid-summer, and the final version of the defense authorization will likely not reach the president’s desk until after that time, rendering Hunter’s provision useless.
Sarvis said the Senate schedule won’t allow for floor consideration of the defense authorization bill until July and the conference committee at the earliest would be in late September or October.
“If we have certification this summer, the 60 days may well have run before the September-October conference,” Sarvis said. “And, I think — the authors of some of these ‘delay-derail’ amendments — they know that.”
Sainz also noted that Republicans are going to have a problem in passing the amendment into law because it runs contrary to the previously stated Republican emphasis on economic issues during the 2010 election.
“This is a complete and total diversion from the American people’s priorities on the economy, jobs and dinner table issues,” Sainz said. “The American public does not believe that this issue needs to be considered once again, and we will make sure the people understand that this is a complete and total disconnect from what the priorities should be.”
Akin plans measure to prevent same-sex marriage at bases
Another planned amendment follows controversy in the wake of new Navy policy guidance stating that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal would enable same-sex marriage ceremonies to take place on military facilities and that Navy chaplains can officiate over these ceremonies.
Steve Taylor, a spokesperson for Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), said his boss intends to introduce a measure that would rollback the new guidance issued by the Navy.
“He intends to offer an amendment Wednesday,” Taylor said. “It would say that marriages [are] allowed to be performed on bases when they comply with DOMA.”
According to the Navy memo, which is dated April 13 and signed by Chief of Navy Chaplains Rear Adm. Mark Tidd, the new guidance was issued after the Navy conducted legal review of the issue of same-sex marriages and questions emerged related to same-sex marriage during the initial course of Navy training for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.
The guidance states that use of base facilities is “sexual orientation neutral” on the issue using base facilities for same-sex marriage.
“If the base is located in a state where same-sex marriage is legal, then base facilities may normally be used to celebrate the marriage,” the memo states.
Additionally, the memo says Navy chaplains are allowed to perform same-sex marriages in their official capacity if they chose to do so.
“Regarding chaplain participation, consistent with the tenets of his or her religious organization, a chaplain may officiate a same-sex, civil marriage: if it is conducted in accordance with the laws of a state which permits same-sex marriages or union; and if the chaplain is, according to applicable state and local laws, otherwise fully certified to officiate that state’s marriage,” the memo states.
The memo states that the guidance with regarding to having same-sex marriages on base is a change to earlier training, which stated that same-sex marriages aren’t permitted on federal property. According to the memo, the guidance for chaplains is not a change, but “a clearer, more concise and up to date articulation” of policy.
Following the emergence of the letter this week, Akin and 62 other Republican U.S. members wrote to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in a letter dated May 6 stating the policy change doesn’t comply with DOMA.
“We find it difficult to understand how the military is somehow exempt from abiding by federal law,” the letter states. “Not only does this document imply recognition and support of same-sex marriages, but it also implies that the Navy will now perform these marriages so long as they do not violate state statutes.”
The letter adds that DOMA “protects the sanctity of the bond specifically between a man and a woman” and continues that “as defenders of the institution of marriage we agree with the vast majority of the American people that the preservation of marriage is critical to society’s stability and is in the best interest of American families.”
Despite the letter, several recent polls have found that a majority of the American public now supports marriage rights for same-sex couples. A poll last month from CNN found that 51 percent of American believes marriages between gay and lesbian couples “should be recognized by the law as valid” while 47 percent remain opposed.
Sarvis said the memo is being circulating on Capitol Hill by anti-gay activists seeking to invoke the more controversial debate on same-sex marriage in an attempt to disrupt to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.
“The operative word in that letter is ‘may,'” Sarvis said. “They ‘may’ use the facilities. The chaplain ‘may’ elect to marry two gay service members on post if marriage is permitted by state law in that state.”
Sarvis added no chaplain is required to marry anyone — regardless of whether the marriage is same-sex or opposite-sex — if the chaplain has an objection to the union. Further, Sarvis said that no language in DOMA speaks to facilities on military installations.
However, Sarvis said the committee would pass the amendment if House Armed Services Committee Chair Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) characterizes it as a party-line vote for Republican committee members.
“If the chairman of the committee positions it as a party-line, then the numbers on the committee would indicate that such an amendment would likely pass by party-line, and, who knows, it could pick up a couple Democrats,” Sarvis said.
National
HRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey
Organization cites rise in homophobic, transphobic policies, worse mental health outcomes
The Human Rights Campaign is slamming the White House — and the Department of Education — following their removal of some LGBTQ bullying data from federal data collection.
The Civil Rights Data Collection is a mandated survey of all public school districts that collects figures on a wide variety of statistics about students — including demographics that include race, ethnicity, sex, disability status, and English learner status; course-level enrollment data, such as how many students are enrolled in advanced placement or honors classes; and school climate information, such as rates of bullying, harassment, suspensions, and expulsions.
That data collection has been ongoing since 1968 — nearly six decades — but now has a major change in what questions are being asked, or not asked, that advocates are largely attributing to the Trump-Vance administration’s culture war fight on LGBTQ children in the country.
Changes to the 2025-2026 survey questions — approved by the Office of Budget and Management in July — eliminated a space for schools to report how many students identify as nonbinary, how often those students are victims of harassment and bullying, and whether school districts have policies prohibiting gender identity-based incidents.
K-12 Dive, a publication that focuses its reporting on news related to K-12 education, first published a list of these data collection changes from 2024-2025 to 2025-2026.
These questions, as well as others that included LGBTQ student topics on treatment in schools, were added to the CRDC under the Biden-Harris administration. By including these questions, policymakers hoped this would lead to increased investigations into discrimination complaints, initiate compliance reviews, and provide policy guidance to districts, according to Education Department documents.
The CRDC also eliminated the mention of “gender identity” from the definition of rape and sexual assault. The prior collection of data (before the Trump-Vance administration changed it) defined rape as something that could be done to “all students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation, or gender identity.” Now, the new data collection questions say, “All students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation can be victims of rape,” removing “gender identity” from the new definition.
By removing and changing definitions, this could have a real-world impact on some of the school’s most vulnerable students. According to CRDC data from 2021-2022, more than 1,800 school districts reported enrolling one or more nonbinary students.
Additional data also shows that the changes to data collection is harming public school students. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee released a report in April finding that the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to all but close the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights has left students facing discrimination and harassment throughout the country without the federal recourse they are entitled to under federal law.
The Williams Institute, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, has data indicating the true number of nonbinary and transgender children is much higher — they estimate that for children ages 13 to 17, nearly 724,000 identify as nonbinary or trans.
This is in line with a slew of policies pushed by the Trump-Vance administration since their federal takeover. Within his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” This directive attempts to make the federal definition of gender unchangeable, determined by sex assigned at birth alone.
Within his first month of his second term, Trump issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.
He also pushed multiple anti-trans executive orders, including Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” and Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” targeting trans athletes and military members, respectively.
These policies have a real-world impact on trans people.
The Trevor Project, a nonprofit dedicated to crisis and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people under 25, reported that, for the seventh year in a row, LGBTQ youth are at higher risk for suicide as a result of mistreatment and stigmatization.
Trevor Project data showed that nearly 60 percent of LGBTQ young people ages 13-17 said they were bullied in the past year, and that 36 percent of LGBTQ youth seriously considered suicide in the last year. The data shows a bigger discrepancy for trans youth, with that number hovering around 40 percent considering suicide.
HRC President Kelley Robinson issued a statement following the approval of the new data collection questions that leaves LGBTQ students’ bullying statistics under — if not completely unreported.
“If there was even a shadow of a doubt, this latest move by the Trump administration makes it abundantly clear they do not care about the safety of LGBTQ+ students, and trans students in particular,” Robinson said. “These are adults who should be protecting our kids. And instead, they are making sure bullying and harassment are not tracked. If they are not tracked, bullying and harassment cannot be prevented or stopped — which is exactly what the Trump administration wants. Parents deserve to know their kids are safe at school, and every single young person deserves dignity and safety at school. Anything less is plain evil.”
HRC has a “Welcoming Schools” initiative that they say is the “most comprehensive” bias-based bullying prevention program in the nation. The program includes LGBTQ and gender-inclusive resources for schools, help navigating special education and disability resources for LGBTQ-identifying students, and other tools to help schools become more inclusive.
This program has been in effect for nearly two decades and, according to HRC, reaches nearly 750,000 students.
The Washington Blade reached out to both the Department of Education and Office of Management and Budget for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.
Michigan
Progressives score victory as El-Sayed wins Mich. Senate primary
Democratic newcomer will face Rogers in November
Michigan held its primary on Tuesday, allowing the two major political parties to select their nominees to go head-to-head for the state’s U.S. Senate seat.
NBC News called the Democratic race early, giving the victory to physician Abdul El-Sayed over incumbent U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in an extremely close primary. El-Sayed won 48.5 percent of the primary vote, with Stevens trailing by just one percentage point at 47.5 percent.
Both candidates have campagined on supporting the LGBTQ community through different avenues— for El-Sayed he focused on his past promoting HIV and PrEP funding and research. Stevens focused on her legislative history working to support transgender rights in the state.
This is a major win for progressive Democrats, who have been bearing the brunt of political attacks from President Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and centrist Democrats.
El-Sayed, a former health director in Detroit, ran his campaign largely on making life in the Great Lakes State more affordable amid rising costs. His policies include promoting “Medicare for All,” pushing health policy that targets the regressive efforts of the Trump-Vance administration that rolls back funding for both Women and LGBTQ people, minimizing the growing amount of money in politics, and he was very vocal in his criticism of Stevens for supporting aid to Israel. He was endorsed by two major progressives — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Stevens, the four-term congresswoman, is much closer to establishment Democrats on policy than El-Sayed.
During her time in the federal government, she has consistently supported the Equality Act, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She has also emphasized supporting local manufacturing and lowering housing costs in the state.
She was named to Advocates for Trans Equality’s 118th Congressional Champions list for her pro-trans policies and was endorsed by establishment heavy hitters Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
The contentious race boiled down not only to Michigan affairs but also extended to international conflicts — namely Palestine. (South Africa has filed a case in the International Court of Justice in The Hague that accuses Israel of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip after Oct. 7.) This primary also acted as one of the first major races that pushed back against AIPAC, a lobbying group that works to promote pro-Israel candidates in U.S. elections. The group has been involved in domestic politics since 1954.
AIPAC devoted a massive amount of money to this race.
The Associated Press reported that the pro-Israel lobbying group spent more than $30 million on ads against El-Sayed because of his vocal denunciation of Israel and his continued criticism of its policies towards Palestine.
Michigan has a large Muslim and Arab American population, which could, in part, explain how El-Sayed was able to win.
The Republican side was far less competitive. Former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) ran unopposed and clinched the GOP nomination. He has consistently held anti-LGBTQ positions, going as far as voting multiple times for a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, voting against repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and supporting efforts to directly target the attempted expansion of Title IX protections to include trans people.
El-Sayed will face off against Rogers in November for Michigan’s Senate seat — one that could have lasting impacts not only on the state’s politics but also on the Republicans’ narrow Senate majority and Trump’s political agenda.
National
White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits
Administration criticizes National Museum of American History
The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.
According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”
Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.
Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.
“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.
The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.
The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.
The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”
The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.
It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”
Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”
On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.
In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.
House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”
In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.
Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.
“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.
Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.
It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.
An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)
Don’t miss summer productions at Clear Space in Rehoboth Beach
New LGBTQ visitor center slated for Wilmington, Del.
PHOTOS: World Pride March
Tens of thousands take part in World Pride March
PHOTOS: Daddy Issues at Kiki
Continue to engage in community after Pride month
D.C.’s Mary’s House For Older Adults names new executive director
Suzanne Goode is not good for Rehoboth Beach
Calendar: August 7-13
