Connect with us

National

NETROOTS: Pfeiffer suggests 1996 Obama statement supporting marriage equality a fake

‘That questionnaire was actually filled out by someone else’

Published

on

MINNEAPOLIS ā€” White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer on Friday suggested President Obama’s stated support for same-sex marriage in a 1996 questionnaire response was fake, despite the signature from Obama attached to the statement.

“If you actually go back and look, that questionnaire was actually filled out by someone else, not the president,” Pfeiffer said.

Pfeiffer made the remarks during a question-and-answer panel during the Netroots Nation convention in which Daily Kos’ Kaili Joy Gray inquired about the 1996 statement from Obama.

When he was running to become an Illinois state senator, Obama said in a questionnaire response to what is now the Windy City Times that he favors “legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.ā€

Obama has since said he believes marriage is between one man and one woman, although he supports civil unions. Late last year, Obama suggested his position on same-sex marriage could “evolve,” but he hasn’t come out in support of marriage equality.

“It seems like his position has actually evolved from being more supportive of civil rights to less supportive,” Gray observed during Netroots Nation. “Is the president going to evolve again and get back to supporting civil rights on gay marriage?”

After Pfeiffer responded that the questionnaire was “filled out by someone else,” Gray asked him to clarify if he believes the response was “fake.”

Pfeiffer replied, “What I was going to tell you is the president’s position is being consistent on this.”

Pressed further on whether he believes the questionnaire response was phony, Pfeiffer said, “This was litigated in the campaign. There were a number of other issues on the campaign.”

Those in the audience during the question-and-answer session responded to Pfeiffer’s remarks on the 1996 statement on marriage with audible boos and gaps. Although Pfeiffer contends that the 1996 questionnaire response wasn’t filled out by the president, the statement submitted to the Windy City Times, then known as Outlines, has his signature on the document.

Pfeiffer later continued, “The president’s position on gay marriage ā€” and I will say it ā€” is that he has been against it, but he said the country has been evolving on this, and he is evolving on it.”

Pfeiffer added Obama has been evolving on the marriage because he “has friends, staffers who are in committed gay partnerships who are great people, great partners, great friends, great parents their children ā€” and he is evolving on that.”

Additionally, Pfeiffer said he couldn’t say “when that evolution will continue,” but added there are “people in this room have pushed him on this, and he believes should continue to push him on it.”

UPDATE: In a statement issued following Pfeiffer’s remarks, Windy City Times publisher Tracy Baim asserted that her newspaper stands by the reporting in 1996 on Obama’s questionnaire response.

“This is the first time a claim has been made that Obama did not complete the surveys himself, even though his signature is on the typed one sent to Outlines, and the IMPACT survey appears to be completed in his own writing,” the statement says.

According to the Windy City Times, the questionnaire response was faxed from the law firm for which Obama at the time. Additionally, Outlines newspaper subsequently reported that he backed gay marriage, something his campaign never denied in 1996.

“He would have had a very small campaign staff, so it was unlikely he had someone else complete the form,” the statement says. “In fact he went to the trouble of typing full answers when the form was actually able to be completed as a Q&A. Even if someone else completed the form, Obama signed it, and never denied subsequent reports of its content.”

UPDATE: The White House is backing off of the comments Pfeiffer made on Friday on Obama’s 1996 statement in support of same-sex marriage. Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, addressed the issue in a statement:

ā€œDan was not familiar with the history of the questionnaire that was brought up today, but the presidentā€™s views are clear,” Inouye said. “He has long supported equal rights and benefits for gay and lesbian couples and since taking office he has signed into law the repeal of ‘Donā€™t Ask Donā€™t Tell,’ signed into law the hate crimes bill, made the decision not to defend Section 3 of DOMA and expanded federal benefits for same sex partners of federal employees.ā€

Inouye didn’t respond to a further question from the Washington Blade to verify whether the White House believes the president in fact filled out the questionnaire in 1996.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Detroit teen arrested in fatal stabbing of gay man

Prosecutor says defendant targeted victim from online dating app

Published

on

Officials say Ahmed Al-Alikhan allegedly fatally stabbed Howard Brisendine. (Photo of Al-Alikhan courtesy of the Detroit Police Department; photo of Brisendine via GoFundMe)

A 17-year-old Detroit man has been charged with first-degree murder for the Sept. 24 stabbing death of a 64-year-old gay man that prosecutors say he met through an online dating app.

A statement released by the Wayne County, Mich., Prosecutorā€™s Office says Ahmed Al-Alikhan allegedly fatally stabbed Howard Brisendine inside Brisendineā€™s home in Detroit before he allegedly took the victimā€™s car keys and stole the car.

The statement says police arrived on the scene about 4:04 p.m. on Sept. 29 after receiving a call about a deceased person found in their home. Upon arrival police found Brisentine deceased in his living room suffering from multiple stab wounds, the statement says.

ā€œIt is alleged that the defendant targeted the victim on an online dating app because he was a member of the LGBTQ community,ā€ according to the prosecutorā€™s statement.

ā€œIt is further alleged that on Sept. 24, 2024, at the victimā€™s residence in the 6000 block of Minock Street in Detroit, the defendant stabbed the victim multiple times, fatally injuring him, before taking the victimā€™s car keys and fleeing the scene in his vehicle,ā€ it says.

It further states that Al-Alikhan was first taken into custody by police in Dearborn, Mich., and later turned over to the Detroit police on Oct. 1. The statement doesn’t say how police learned that Al-Alikhan was the suspected perpetrator. 

In addition to first-degree murder, Al-Alikhan has been charged with felony murder and unlawful driving away in an automobile.

ā€œIt is hard to fathom a more planned series of events in this case,ā€ prosecutor Kym Worthy said in the statement. ā€œUnfortunately, the set of alleged facts are far too common in the LGBTQ community,ā€ Worthy said. ā€œWe will bring justice to Mr. Brisendine. The defendant is 17 years and 11 months old ā€“ mere weeks away from being an adult offender under the law.ā€

She added, ā€œAs a result of that and the heinous nature of this crime, we will seek to try him as an adult.ā€

A spokesperson for the prosecutorā€™s office said the office has not designated the incident as a hate crime, but said regardless of that designation, a conviction of first-degree murder could result in a sentence of life in prison. The spokesperson, Maria Lewis, said the prosecutorā€™s office was not initially disclosing the name of the dating app through which the two men met, but said that would be disclosed in court as the case proceeds.

The NBC affiliate station in Detroit, WDIV TV, reported that Brisendine was found deceased by Luis Mandujano, who lives near where Brisendine lived and who owns the Detroit gay bar Gigā€™s, where Brisendine worked as a doorman. The NBC station report says Mandujano said he went to Brisendineā€™s house on Sept. 29 after Brisendine did not show up for work and his car was not at his house.

Mandujano, who is organizing a GoFundMe fundraising effort for Brisendine, states in his message on the GoFundMe site that Brisendine worked as a beloved doorman at Gigiā€™s bar.

ā€œWe will do what we can to honor Howardā€™s life as we put him to rest,ā€ Mandujano states in his GoFundMe message. ā€œHe left the material world in a volatile manner at the hand of a monster that took his life for being gay. Letā€™s not allow hate to win!ā€

In response to a Facebook message from the Washington Blade, a spokesperson for Gigiā€™s said the money raised from the GoFundMe effort will be used for Brisendineā€™s funeral expenses and his ā€œremaining bills.ā€ The spokesperson, who didnā€™t disclose their name, added, ā€œAny leftover money will be donated to local LGBTQ nonprofit groups to combat hate.ā€

The GoFundMe site can be accessed here.

Continue Reading

The White House

Karine Jean-Pierre becomes Biden’s fourth openly LGBTQ senior adviser

Press secretary’s promotion was reported on Monday

Published

on

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre (Washington Blade photo by Christopher Kane)

Following White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre’s promotion to a top role on Monday, four of the 10 officials serving as senior advisers to President Joe Biden are openly LGBTQ.

The other LGBTQ members of the president’s innermost circle are White House Communications Director Ben LaBolt, senior adviser to first lady Jill Biden Anthony Bernal, and White House Director of Political Strategy and Outreach Emmy Ruiz.

Jean-Pierre became the first Black and the first LGBTQ White House press secretary in May 2022. She spoke with the Washington Blade for an exclusive interview last spring, shortly before the two-year anniversary of her appointment to that position.

“Jill and I have known and respected Karine a long time and she will be a strong voice speaking for me and this Administration,” Biden said in 2022 when announcing her as press secretary.

Breaking the news of Jean-Pierre’s promotion on Monday, ABC noted the power and influence of the White House communications and press office, given that LaBolt was appointed in August to succeed Anita Dunn when she left her role as senior adviser to the president.

As press secretary, Jean-Pierre has consistently advocated for the LGBTQ community ā€” pushing back forcefully on anti-LGBTQ legislation and reaffirming the president and vice president’s commitments to expanding rights and protections.

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court begins fall term with major gender affirming care case on the docket

Justices rule against Biden admin over emergency abortion question

Published

on

The Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022 to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, The Supreme Court of the U.S.)

The U.S. Supreme Court’s fall term began on Monday with major cases on the docket including U.S. v Skrmetti, which could decide the fate of 24 state laws banning the use of puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors.

First, however, the justices dealt another blow to the Biden-Harris administration and reproductive rights advocates by leaving in place a lower court order that blocked efforts by the federal government to allow hospitals to terminate pregnancies in medical emergencies.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services had issued a guidance instructing healthcare providers to offer abortions in such circumstances, per the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which kicked off litigation over whether the law overrides state abortion restrictions.

The U.S. Court of appeals for the 5th Circuit had upheld a decision blocking the federal government from enforcing the law via the HHS guidance, and the U.S. Department of Justice subsequently asked the Supreme Court to intervene.

The justices also declined to hear a free speech case in which parents challenged a DOJ memo instructing officials to look into threats against public school officials, which sparked false claims that parents were being labeled “domestic terrorists” for raising objections at school board meetings over, especially, COVID policies and curricula and educational materials addressing matters of race, sexuality, and gender.

Looking to the cases ahead, U.S. v. Skrmetti is “obviously the blockbuster case of the term,” a Supreme Court practitioner and lecturer at the Harvard law school litigation clinic told NPR.

The attorney, Deepak Gupta, said the litigation “presents fundamental questions about the scope of state power to regulate medical care for minors, and the rights of parents to make medical decisions for your children.”

The ACLU, which represents parties in the case, argues that Tennessee’s gender affirming care ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by allowing puberty blockers and hormone treatments for cisgender patients younger than 18 while prohibiting these interventions for their transgender counterparts.

The organization notes that “leading medical experts and organizations ā€” such as the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics ā€” oppose these restrictions, which have already forced thousands of families across the country to travel to maintain access to medical care or watch their child suffer without it.”

When passing their bans on gender affirming care, conservative states have cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), which overturned constitutional protections for abortion that were in place since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973.

The ACLU notes “U.S. v. Skrmetti will be a major test of how far the court is willing to stretch Dobbs to allow states to ban other health care” including other types of reproductive care like IVF and birth control.

Also on the docket in the months ahead are cases that will decide core questions about the government’s ability to regulate “ghost guns,” firearms that are made with build-it-yourself kits available online, and the constitutionality of a Texas law requiring age verification to access pornography.

The latter case drew opposition from liberal and conservative groups that argue it will have a chilling effect on adults who, as NPR wrote, “would realistically fear extortion, identity theft and even tracking of their habits by the government and others.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular