National
Carney defers to Justice Dept. on ‘Don’t Ask’ litigation
No comment on Bachmann husband’s ‘ex-gay’ clinic
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney deferred to the Justice and Defense departments on Tuesday in response to inquiries about a court order barring the U.S. government from enforcing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Under questioning from the Washington Blade, Carney deferred to the Justice Department when asked whether the president supports an order last week from a three-judge panel on the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstituting an injunction against the military’s gay ban.
“The Justice Department is reviewing the order, and I think I would point you to them for further information,” Carney said. “The president’s position, obviously, on the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is quite clear and we fought hard to make it happen. And it was a significant accomplishment late last year.”
But pressed on whether Obama was himself supportive of the order, Carney again deferred to the Justice Department.
The Obama administration has the option to appeal the panel’s injunction barring enforcement of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to the full Ninth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court. The Pentagon has instituted a moratorium to comply with the injunction, but has said it’s reviewing the decision with the Justice Department to determine whether it will appeal.
Asked about the possibility of challenging the order, Carney again deferred to the Justice Department, saying, “I think that’s the same answer.”
The injunction was put in place after legislation was signed in December allowing for repeal after 60 days pass following certification from the president, the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Troops have undertaken training to prepare for open service, but certification hasn’t taken place.
At a recent Pride reception at the White House, Obama said certification will happen in a matters of “weeks, not months.”
Carney deferred to the Pentagon when asked if the court order would impact the timing for the certification of repeal, although he added he expects certification in the “near future” and doesn’t expect the injunction to change that process.
“I think as the process moves forward I’ll refer you to the Defense Department,” Carney said. “I know Secretary Gates said shortly before he left that it was moving along very well and he would expect it to happen in the near future, but I don’t think there’s any impact.”
Carney also deferred to the Pentagon when asked if a more definite timeline has been set for certification, although he said he doesn’t think a date has been set.
“I would refer you to the Defense Department, but I don’t believe so,” Carney said.
Also, Carney declined to answer a question from ABC News Radio on whether the White House takes issue with federal money going to a counseling clinic that engages in ‘ex-gay’ therapy.
“I confess I do not have an answer to that question,” Carney said.
This week, Truth Wins Out revealed that Marcus Bachmann, the spouse of Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann, operates a clinic that engages in reparative therapy. The clinic reportedly has received federal dollars.
A partial transcript of the remarks between Carney and reporters on LGBT issues follows:
ABC News Radio: Does the White House have any problem with federal dollars being sent to a counseling clinic that engages in the controversial therapy of trying to cure people of being gay?
Jay Carney: Ann, I confess I do not have an answer to that question.
…
Washington Blade: Some questions on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Last week, the Ninth Circuit issued an order barring the government from enforcing this law. I’m sure the president heard the news last week. Was he supportive of the decision?
Carney: Is he aware of it?
Blade: I’m sure he heard the news last week. Is he supportive of it?
Carney: The Justice Department is reviewing the order, and I think I would point you to them for further information. The president’s position, obviously, on the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is quite clear and we fought hard to make it happen. And it was a significant accomplishment late last year.
Blade: But as the head of the administration, was the president supportive of this court order ending that enforcement of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”?
Carney: Um, again I’m going to refer you to the Justice Department.
Blade: Do you anticipate that the administration will challenge or appeal this decision?
Carney: I think that’s the same answer.
Blade: What impact is this going to have on repeal certification? The president said before it’s going to happen in a matter of weeks, not months? Is it going to have any impact on that?
Carney: I think as the process moves forward I’ll refer you to the Defense Department. I know Secretary Gates said shortly before he left that it was moving along very well and he would expect it to happen in the near future, but I don’t think there’s any impact.
Blade: Is the definite date or time set for when that’s going to happen?
Carney: I would refer you to the Defense Department, but I don’t believe so.
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.
The White House
Trump travels to Middle East countries with death penalty for homosexuality
President traveled to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and United Arab Emirates
Homosexuality remains punishable by death in two of the three Middle East countries that President Donald Trump visited last week.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar are among the handful of countries in which anyone found guilty of engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations could face the death penalty.
Trump was in Saudi Arabia from May 13-14. He traveled to Qatar on May 14.
“The law prohibited consensual same-sex sexual conduct between men but did not explicitly prohibit same-sex sexual relations between women,” notes the State Department’s 2023 human rights report, referring specifically to Qatar’s criminalization law. “The law was not systematically enforced. A man convicted of having consensual same-sex sexual relations could receive a sentence of seven years in prison. Under sharia, homosexuality was punishable by death; there were no reports of executions for this reason.”
Trump on May 15 arrived in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates.
The State Department’s 2023 human rights report notes the “penalty for individuals who engaged in ‘consensual sodomy with a man'” in the country “was a minimum prison sentence of six months if the individual’s partner or guardian filed a complaint.”
“There were no known reports of arrests or prosecutions for consensual same-sex sexual conduct. LGBTQI+ identity, real or perceived, could be deemed an act against ‘decency or public morality,’ but there were no reports during the year of persons prosecuted under these provisions,” reads the report.
The report notes Emirati law also criminalizes “men who dressed as women or entered a place designated for women while ‘disguised’ as a woman.” Anyone found guilty could face up to a year in prison and a fine of up to 10,000 dirhams ($2,722.60.)
Trump returned to the U.S. on May 16.
The White House notes Trump during the trip secured more than $2 trillion “in investment agreements with Middle Eastern nations ($200 billion with the United Arab Emirates, $600 billion with Saudi Arabia, and $1.2 trillion with Qatar) for a more safe and prosperous future.”
Former President Joe Biden traveled to Saudi Arabia in 2022.
Saudi Arabia is scheduled to host the 2034 World Cup. The 2022 World Cup took place in Qatar.
Let love and compassion guide our response to Joe Biden’s cancer diagnosis
D.C. Black Pride 2025: Events, parties, and empowerment
Cuban lawmakers to consider simplifying process for trans people to change IDs
Frank Kameny’s legacy lives on
