Connect with us

National

Illinois Civil Unions go into effect today

Law that guarantees same-sex couples in Illinois 648 benefits and privileges of opposite-sex unions goes into effect today; lines at County Clerk’s office in Chicago out into the street.

Published

on

Illinois

Bernard Cherkasov, the C.E.O. of Equality Illinois, is beaming with pride today.

“It’s a fantastic day.” Cherkasov told the Blade over the phone from his desk at the Equality Illinois offices in the Lakeview neighborhood of Chicago, “We’re celebrating civil unions [for same-sex couples in the state of Illinois]. There is something special about today. The weather is beautiful and people are just smiling. I woke up this morning, suddenly, with 648 new rights and benefits that i didn’t have yesterday. The phone has been ringing off the hook with people asking ‘is it really here?’ and I say ‘yes, civil unions are now actually law!’”

According to Cherkasov, some of the new rights guaranteed by the law are hospital visitation rights beyond visitor hours, emergency medical decision making powers, inheritance rights and the ability for same-sex parents who give birth to a child to have both parents on the birth certificate.

Advocates in Illinois won over both houses in the legislature during the lame duck session, in the last days the lawmakers were gathered in Springfield before the new year, in order to pass the Civil Unions law authored by openly gay Chicago representative, Greg Harris. Governor Pat Quinn, who won re-election in November, signed the bill into law early this year to the delight of families throughout Illinois.

“The downside for me is that I had to be up at something like five in the morning,” joked long-time gay civil rights activist and lead lobbyist in the push for Civil Unions last year, Rick Garcia.

“But this morning I went to Cook county, they opened the office up early, and they were brilliant at the way they had it all arranged and everything was phenomenal.”

Garcia was stunned at the turnout today for licences. “I walked in at a little before 7:00 A.M. and there was this huge line all the way from the Clerk’s office out to the street. I was completely overwhelmed and started to cry. I’ve been crying since six o’clock this morning!”

Garcia looked on as the first couple was given their license and Cook county Illinois conferred its first official Civil Union.

“I could barely see them through the tears in my eyes.”

Anthony Martinez, Executive Director of Illinois LGBT advocacy group, The Civil Rights Agenda, felt a surge of pride this morning as he witnessed couples being conferred legal Civil Unions for the first time in Illinois.

“I am Absolutely thrilled and excited to be witnessing the amazing amount of support and outpouring from the community for civil unions,” Martinez gushed. “These couples have been waiting for this for years and now they can go apply and get recognized. This drives our work at The Civil Rights Agenda, and we’re so thrilled for all of this.”

Martinez is also aware that challenges to these happy couples are still a major risk to be monitored. Last week, the opponents of the Civil Unions law, led by anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera of the conservative activist group, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, called for a voter referendum in the state of Illinois on an Amendment to the Illinois constitution barring recognition of any same-sex partnerships.

“There’s a battle between gay rights and religious freedom,” he told the Chicago Tribune this week. “We want to give Illinois voters the same opportunity other states have had.”

Martinez is doubtful that the group will be able to collect the 300,000 signatures needed to get the referendum on the ballot, but prefers to stay vigilant.

“in terms of what’s next, we take any attack on relationship recognition very seriously, especially with this marriage referendum. Though we don’t believe it will gain traction, we are watching it very closely, and want to make sure any attacks are addressed and that there is a plan and strategy in place to make sure those attacks are defeated.”

He’s also eager to concentrate on celebrating today’s victory.

“Friday we’re going to have sixty couples get committed at a mass civil union ceremony at 5:30 at the Chicago History Museum. Its going to be massive.”

Rick Garcia sees today’s victory as validation for years of hard work.

“One of the things I realized was that was where the rubber hit the road for me. On hot hot days like today in Springfield, you walk around the capital building, and its muggy, but today you see the fruit of your work. People who needed protections and benefits are getting what they deserved today.”

“I’m more thrilled than I thought I would be.”

“This has been a hard spring for us, because there have been six attempts to modify or scrap the civil unions bill. Had it not been for [Illinois LGBT advocacy group] The Civil Rights Agenda and the ACLU, today would have been much different. They stopped every piece of legislation that would attempt to gut this. I’m looking at these couples, together–some for a short time, some for a long time–waiting for this and never expected to see this day, and here it is!”

“That said,” Garcia continued, “separate is not equal. We deserve one set of rules; one yard stick for everyone. We’re going to celebrate for two days, today and tomorrow when ceremonies are allowed to take place for the first time; but the day after we have work to do and that work is equal marriage.”

At the Clerk’s office, Garcia was speaking off camera with several television reporters, one of of which remarked, “Oh my God, Rick you look like the proud father!”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

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

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

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.

Continue Reading

National

Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information

Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources

Published

on

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is named as a defendant in the lawsuit. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

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.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections

Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent

Published

on

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Screen capture: YouTube)

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.

Continue Reading

Popular