National
Immigration bill includes pro-gay language
LGBT immigration group seeks expansion of prosecutorial authority outlined in memo
New efforts emerged this week to address the inequity in U.S. immigration law preventing bi-national same-sex couples from staying together in the United States, although hurdles remain for each of the initiatives.
An LGBT immigration group called on the Obama administration to broaden a recent memo indicating when immigration officials can exercise discretion in deportation cases to include protections for gay bi-national couples. Meanwhile, comprehensive immigration reform legislation has been introduced in the Senate that includes a provision enabling gay Americans to sponsor their foreign same-sex partners for residency in the United States.
Under current immigration code, straight Americans can sponsor their spouses for residency in the United States through the green card application process if their spouses are foreign nationals. The same rights aren’t available to gay Americans. Consequently, foreign nationals who are in committed relationships with gay Americans may have to leave the country upon expiration of their temporary visas or face deportation.
On Monday, Immigration Equality called on U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement to clarify that the definition of ‘family’ and ‘spouse’ used in a June 17 memo to immigration officials include specifically bi-national same-sex couples.
The memo outlines cases in which immigration officials can exercise prosecutorial authority to include considerations such as an agency’s civil immigration enforcement priorities and whether a potential deportee is pursuing higher education or has served in the U.S. military.
However, the guidance makes no explicit mention of gay couples. It states that those with “family relationships” in the United States, or individuals with a “U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse” may be considered for discretion, but doesn’t spell out whether those terms are inclusive of same-sex couples.
Rachel Tiven, Immigration Equality’s executive director, said an explicit mention of same-sex bi-national couples is necessary to ensure they can receive protections under the prosecutorial authority available to immigration officials.
“Given the absence of any LGBT family recognition at the federal level, the decision not to explicitly include our spouses and partners in the ICE memo is striking,” Tiven said. “If the administration does support efforts to keep LGBT families together, it should tell its field offices as much. If it does not, it must explain why. In the interim, families are being torn apart and American citizens are being separated from their spouses. There is simply no government interest served in such draconian enforcement of our immigration laws.”
The request to expand the memo comes on the heels of letters that U.S. senators and members of Congress sent to the Obama administration asking for a moratorium on the deportations of foreign nationals who are legally recognized same-sex marriage with U.S. citizens and would be eligible for marriage-based green cards if not for the Defense of Marriage Act.
Even though President Obama announced in February that DOMA is unconstitutional, the administration has said in the response to these requests it would continue to enforce DOMA.
Gillian Christensen, an Immigration & Customs Enforcement spokesperson, similarly said her agency would continue to enforce DOMA in response to the most recent request from Immigration Equality.
“Pursuant to the attorney general’s guidance, the Defense of Marriage Act remains in effect and the executive branch, including [the Department of Homeland & Security], will continue to enforce it unless and until Congress repeals it or there a final judicial determination that it is unconstitutional,” Christensen said.
Christopher Nugent, who’s gay and co-chair of the American Bar Association’s rights of immigrants committee, was skeptical that Immigration & Customs Enforcement would make the change in accordance with Immigration Equality’s request.
“I am optimistic by nature but doubtful of such change with … with all the political battles going on here and with the economic woes,” Nugent said.
A new path has also been opened to address the hardships faced by bi-national same-sex couples through legislative means. On Wednesday, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) introduced comprehensive immigration reform legislation that includes a family reunification provision for gay couples.
Menendez’ legislation, which seeks to enhance border security and offers a path to citizenship for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, contains language similar to standalone legislation known as the Uniting American Families Act, which would enable gay Americans to sponsor their same-sex partners for residency in the United States.
Late last year, Menendez introduced similar comprehensive legislation that also included a UAFA-like provision. The legislation also contains language similar to the DREAM Act, which would offer young, undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship if they obtain a college education or enlist in the U.S. military.
In a statement, Menendez said the legislation is a signal that lawmakers are “serious about fixing our broken immigration system.”
“We stand for a complete solution — a real solution — to end undocumented immigration and restore the rule of law,” Menendez said. “This is common-sense legislation that addresses the realities of the situation, stops the flow across our borders, and contributes to our economic recovery.”
Tiven said Immigration Equality stands behind Menendez and is “ready, willing and able to rally the LGBT community, and our families and allies” in the effort to pass his comprehensive immigration reform legislation this year.
“Today’s bill is supported by the top Democratic lawmakers in the Senate, including the chairmen of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Immigration, Refugees and Border Security Subcommittee,” Tiven said. “We stand with them, and our allies in the LGBT and immigrant communities, in supporting reform that honors all families and offers an inclusive vision of America.”
Original co-sponsors for the legislation include Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev), Assistant Majority Leader Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). The legislation has no Republican co-sponsors.
The chances of passing comprehensive immigration reform legislation would be challenging with Republicans in control of the House in the 112th Congress. However, the legislation may see movement — or at least a committee hearing — in the Democratic Senate.
During a news conference on Wednesday, Leahy, whose committee has jurisdiction over the bill, pledged to hold hearings on the legislation, but said the focus now is to introduce legislation to encourage discussion among other senators.
“We’ll see it when we get up enough support, it looks like the best time, we’ll start having these hearings and we will report,” Leahy said.
The White House expressed support for comprehensive immigration reform, but hasn’t articulated support for a UAFA-like provision as a component of the bill.
Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said via e-mail President Obama backs the passage of comprehensive immigration reform in response to an inquiry on the bill, but made no mention of the provision for same-sex couples in his statement.
“The president has spoken clearly about the need to fix the broken immigration system so that it meets America’s economic and security needs for the 21st century,” Inouye said. “We welcome Sen. Menendez’s leadership on this economic imperative, as well as any constructive effort to reach the bipartisan consensus necessary to pass a legislative solution in Congress at the earliest possible opportunity.”
Inouye didn’t respond to a subsequent request to comment on whether the president supports the UAFA-like provision in the legislation. The White House has spoken out against the separation of bi-national same-sex couples, but hasn’t explicitly endorsed any legislation to achieve that end.
Vice President JD Vance and his wife, second lady Usha Vance, will visit Hungary next week.
An announcement the White House released on Thursday said the Vances will be in Budapest, the Hungarian capital, from April 7-8.
JD Vance “will hold bilateral meetings with” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. The announcement further indicates the vice president “will also deliver remarks on the rich partnership between the United States and Hungary.”
The Vances will travel to Hungary less than a week before the country’s parliamentary elections take place on April 12.
Orbán, who has been in office since 2010, and his Fidesz-KDNP coalition government have faced widespread criticism over its anti-LGBTQ crackdown.
The Associated Press notes polls indicate Orbán is trailing Péter Magyar and his center-right Tisza party.
President Donald Trump removed Attorney General Pam Bondi from her post Thursday, following growing criticism over how she and the Department of Justice handled a range of issues, including matters related to sex offender and Trump ally Jeffrey Epstein.
Trump announced Bondi’s removal on Truth Social, where he also said Todd Blanche will serve as acting head of the Justice Department.
“Pam Bondi is a great American patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my attorney general over the past year,” Trump wrote on the platform. “Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown on crime across our country, with murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900.”
Trump was seen as recently as Wednesday with the now-former attorney general at a Supreme Court hearing on citizenship.
The decision contrasts with Trump’s previous public praise of Bondi, the 87th U.S. attorney general and former 37th attorney general of Florida, who served in that role from 2011-2019 before joining the Trump-Vance administration. He has frequently lauded her loyalty and said he speaks with her often. Bondi was also one of president’s defense lawyers during his first impeachment trial.
Privately, however, Trump had grown frustrated that Bondi was not “moving quickly enough” to prosecute critics and political adversaries he wanted to face criminal charges, according to multiple sources. The New York Times reported that her inability to charge former FBI Director James B. Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James with any crimes is a large factor in the president’s choice to fire her from the government’s primary law enforcement agency.
The move comes as Trump has sought to minimize public turmoil within his administration, avoiding the perception of a revolving-door Cabinet that defined his first term.
Lee Zeldin, a former Republican congressman from New York who unsuccessfully ran for governor, has emerged as a leading contender to lead the Justice Department. He has been one of Trump’s most reliable allies.
“He’s our secret weapon,” Trump said of Zeldin in February during a White House event promoting the coal industry, adding, “He’s getting those approvals done in record-setting time.”
Bondi has also growing faced scrutiny from Congress.
The House Oversight Committee recently subpoenaed her to testify about the department’s handling of certain files, where she declined to answer key questions during a contentious House Judiciary Committee hearing in February.
The Tampa native has a long history of opposing LGBTQ rights through her roles in government. As Florida attorney general, she fought against the legalization of same-sex marriage, arguing it would cause “serious public harm,” pushing forward a legal battle that cost taxpayers nearly half a million dollars. She also asked the Florida Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling that found the state’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.
More recently, Bondi established a “Title IX Special Investigations Team” within the Justice Department focused on restricting transgender women and girls from participating in women’s and girls’ sports teams and accessing facilities aligned with their gender identity. She also told Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia to turn over the medical records of anyone under 19 who received gender-affirming care.
Her removal follows Trump’s decision last month to oust another controversial female Cabinet figure, Kristi Noem.
The White House
VIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
Eugene Ramirez booed first family at Kennedy Center
President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump attended the opening night of “Chicago” at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Tuesday. They were greeted by a mix of cheers, applause, and some audible boos.
Among them was Eugene Ramirez, a gay Washington resident, who later shared his account of the night after being briefly detained by security for booing the president and giving a thumbs-down gesture — an expression of what many would call a textbook definition of constitutionally protected speech to criticize the government.
Ramirez attended the opening night performance with a group of friends, hoping to catch a final show before the center undergoes two years of major changes under Trump oversight. The musical, based on a 1926 play of the same name, has become synonymous with Broadway success.
With music by John Kander, lyrics by Fred Ebb, and a book by Ebb and Bob Fosse, “Chicago” has cemented itself as a cultural staple — known for its signature Fosse choreography, stripped-down staging, and sleek, campy aesthetic. The story follows Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly, women who murder their husbands but — with the help of the manipulative, charismatic, and narcissistic attorney Billy Flynn — walk away scot-free.
It remains the longest-running American musical in Broadway history, and its 2002 film adaptation famously won the Academy Award for Best Picture. On this night, however, the production also became the backdrop for a very modern moment of political protest.
“I accompanied five friends to opening night of ‘Chicago’, as a way to enjoy a final performance in the Kennedy Center as we know it,” Ramirez began to recount to the Washington Blade, describing the moment his group settled into their seats inside the ornate Opera House theater.
Just before the performance began, the twice impeached president and first lady appeared in the balcony box, drawing immediate attention from the audience below. Theatergoers stood, cheered, clapped, and waved, while Ramirez made a different choice.
While accounts of the crowd’s reaction have varied, Ramirez said his response was intentional, immediate, and within his rights. Moments after booing and giving a thumbs-down while recording on his iPhone, security intervened.
The video of Ramirez booing the Trump’s is here:
“Within moments, the director [of security] and another guard approached and escorted me to a side area where several other security guards were waiting,” he said. “I was detained until everyone was seated and the lights dimmed.”
As he was escorted away, Ramirez said his instincts as a journalist kicked in. A former lead anchor for Sinclair’s national evening news broadcast, he said the situation immediately felt off — or more aptly put — as if he could see the strings being pulled from someone attempting to control the narrative.
“Journalism is a vocation, not just a job. I immediately knew there wasn’t just an uncomfortable interaction with security,” he said. “The Kennedy Center is a federally funded cultural institution, and being questioned about speech related to the president in that setting felt like something the public should know about.”
Ramirez explained the difference between a standard visit by a public official and this performance: the president’s appearance wasn’t just ceremonial; it was very clearly a media moment.
“The White House press pool was there, and it was clear this was an effort to manage the president’s image in the media,” Ramirez continued. “The irony was not lost on me that this was happening on opening night of ‘Chicago’, a musical about manipulating the press to shape public perception.”
According to Ramirez, the explanation he received from Kennedy Center Director of Safety and Security Karles C. Jackson Sr., was brief, but illuminating.
“He said, ‘they don’t want booing,’ and even called out my thumbs-down gesture. He never clarified who ‘they’ were, but whether it was the administration or the Kennedy Center, the distinction felt meaningless,” he explained. “Mr. Jackson ultimately told me he was just trying to do his job, shook my hand, and allowed me to return to my seat once the lights dimmed and the overture started playing.”
Ramirez said he didn’t blame the guard individually, noting the broader context of the Kennedy Center’s uncertain future and the pressures staff were under.
“With the center closing in the coming months, some of these security guards being pressured to restrict our freedom of speech may only have a few weeks of work left.”
He believes the decision to remove him was driven less by disruption than optics, particularly given the presence of the press.
“It was very clearly about protection — whether protecting the president from visible dissent, or his image before the media present. There was no disruption as almost everyone was standing and reacting loudly to the arrival of the president and first lady, with cheers, applause, and hand gestures. The difference was that my reaction, unlike most, was negative.”
Drawing on his experience covering public officials, Ramirez said the incident felt more about controlling perception than security.
“Usually, law enforcement may monitor or intervene if there’s a disruption, but here there was no disruption at all. Simply expressing dissent in a public, cultural space drew the attention of security. It made it feel less like a matter of decorum and more like an effort to control the narrative around the president,” he said. “It’s about what happens when dissent is treated as disruption rather than a right.”
“The show hadn’t started. I threatened no one. Billy Flynn would have approved of the optics. The rest of us should be paying attention.”
Ramirez framed the incident as part of a broader constitutional concern, one that is plaguing the Trump-Vance administration as they continue to reject rules and normalcy set forth by other reserved presidents.
“Being singled out by security at a federally funded institution for expressing dissent shouldn’t be brushed off; it undermines the First Amendment,” he said, looking at it slightly distanced from it now. “Being of Cuban heritage, and a journalist, it’s a right I’m not willing to give up readily.”
“Publicly funded cultural institutions should allow visible dissent, even in politically charged moments,” he added. “Of course, I understand the need to manage disruptions during a performance, but that was not the case here.”
The themes of “Chicago”, a long-running satire about media manipulation and public perception, added another layer of irony to the experience, Ramirez explained.
“The satire truly leapt off the stage! A show about controlling the narrative, manipulating the press, and covering up truths by leaning on showmanship and distractions. The show is decades old, but could’ve been written today. We’re being razzle-dazzled daily and it’s getting harder to tell fact from fiction, no matter where you get your news.”
He, being gay, also acknowledged how hard it must have been for the performers on stage, assuming that at least some in the cast were also members of the LGBTQ community — and artists — two things Trump doesn’t always get along with.
“It was not lost on me that many of the actors on that stage, that the president and first lady presumably applauded, are members of the LGBTQ community which this administration has rolled back protections for under the guise of religious liberty and free speech, resulting in blatant discrimination.”
He pointed to a particular number that felt surreal given the circumstances.
“Its ‘Razzle Dazzle’ number celebrates keeping audiences off balance; at its climax, a massive American flag descends as the song celebrates blinding audiences to what is real. Watching that scene after being detained for a thumbs-down was surreal.”
Ramirez said the show’s closing lines were especially sharp given the presidential audience and what he just experienced.
“At the end of the show,
Velma says: ‘You know, a lot of people have lost faith in America.’
Roxie replies: ‘And for what America stands for.’
Velma: ‘But we are the living examples of what a wonderful country this is.’
Roxie: ‘So we’d just like to say thank you and God bless you.’
They had both just gotten away with murder!”
His closing lines, however, were a bit more pointed than “scintillating sinners” Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly’s were in the show.
“Democracy only works when citizens are allowed to boo,” he said. “Tuesday night at the Kennedy Center, ‘Chicago’ made that point better than I ever could.”
The Blade reached out to the Kennedy Center but did not receive a comment back.
Women’s FEST returns to Rehoboth Beach next week
Belarusian lawmakers approve bill to crackdown on LGBTQ rights
Calendar: April 3-9
How new barriers to health care coverage are hitting D.C.
Kenyan advocacy groups launch LGBTQ voter mobilization campaign
‘Out for McDuffie’ event held at D.C. gay bar
‘Jonah’ an undeniably compelling but unusual memory play
Thousands attend ‘No Kings’ protests in D.C.
Ghanaian president welcomed to Philadelphia amid backlash over anti-LGBTQ bill
PHOTOS: ‘No Kings’ rally and march
-
District of Columbia4 days ago‘Out for McDuffie’ event held at D.C. gay bar
-
Theater5 days ago
‘Jonah’ an undeniably compelling but unusual memory play
-
The White House4 days ago
Thousands attend ‘No Kings’ protests in D.C.
-
Ghana4 days ago
Ghanaian president welcomed to Philadelphia amid backlash over anti-LGBTQ bill
