National
N.Y. poised to legalize same-sex marriage
One vote needed to ensure passage before legislature adjourns Monday

Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo has submitted a marriage equality bill for the New York state legislature to pass. (Photo by Pat Arnow, courtesy Wikimedia Commons)
The New York Assembly, which is controlled by liberal-leaning Democrats, has passed a same-sex marriage bill several times before and voted again in favor of the measure 80-63 late Wednesday.
With the legislature scheduled to adjourn for the year on Monday, Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a strong supporter of the measure, met on Wednesday with LGBT leaders and other supporters to map out a last-minute game plan for pushing the bill through its final hurdle.
Hopes by supporters that the hurdle would be cleared on Wednesday were dashed when GOP members of the Senate, who hold a 32-30 majority in the chamber, did not take an expected caucus vote to allow the bill to come up on the Senate floor for a debate and vote.
Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos (R-Long Island) told reporters in the state capital in Albany that Republican senators would resume a discussion on the bill on Thursday. But he gave no further details.
Skelos, who opposes the bill, has long said he would allow it to come up for a vote. It could not be immediately determined whether he was wavering on that commitment. Political observers have said the majority leader in the State Senate traditionally has exercised almost unilateral power to decide whether to bring bills to the floor for a vote.
“I believe that votes will be there for marriage equality if the vote happens,” the New York Times quoted Cuomo as saying on Monday.
Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, which lobbies against same-sex marriage bills across the country, has stated on the group’s website that he remains confident that opponents will retain enough votes to defeat the bill.
“What the governor is attempting to do is create a myth of inevitability,” he told the Times. “I don’t think the votes are there.”
But supporters say momentum for passing the bill was growing during the past week. On Monday, three Democratic senators whose support was uncertain earlier in the year announced they will now vote for the measure. Earlier this week two Republican senators announced their support for the bill.
With all but one of the Senate’s 30 Democrats saying they will vote for the bill, just three Republicans are needed to ensure its passage if Skelos allows the bill to come to the floor for a vote. With two Republicans already lined up, supporters say they expect at least one and likely two more Republicans to vote for the measure.
A coalition of LGBT organizations campaigning for the marriage bill has been working full-time over the past several weeks to line up support for the bill in the Senate, according to Marty Rouse, national field director for the Human Rights Campaign, one of the coalition’s partners along with the Empire State Pride Agenda and other groups, including Log Cabin Republicans.
“Phone banks have taken place in several places across the state,” Rouse said in an HRC blog posting. “Field organizers with clip boards and postcards in hand have talked to voters at shopping centers, on main streets, on college campuses, at farmers’ markets, festivals and beaches, in places of worship, in nightclubs, on train platforms and on doorsteps,” he said. “It is this person-to-person conversation that is having an impact.”
In a separate development, the Assembly voted 78-53 on Tuesday to pass the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, which would amend the state’s non-discrimination law to protect transgender people from discrimination in the areas of employment, housing, public accommodations, education and credit.
The action marked the third time the Assembly has passed a transgender non-discrimination measure. However, similar to past years, political observers in Albany expect the bill to die in the GOP-controlled Senate, where a clear majority of senators opposes it.
Supporters of the marriage bill were hopeful that President Obama would join in their celebration of its passage on June 23, when the president is scheduled to attend an LGBT fundraiser for his re-election campaign in Manhattan.
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.