Connect with us

Local

Choi trial opens with clash over White House protest rules

Defense to argue that activist didn’t break the law

Published

on

Dan Choi and 12 other LGBT activists attracted national media attention on Nov. 15, 2010, when they handcuffed themselves to the White House fence.

A lawyer representing gay former Army Lt. Dan Choi questioned five U.S. Park Police officers Monday over the validity of their decision to arrest Choi last November after he handcuffed himself to the White House fence to protest the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law.

Defense attorney Robert Feldman asked the questions while cross-examining the officers during the first day of Choi’s trial at U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Choi faces a possible sentence of six months in jail or a $5,000 fine if convicted on a misdemeanor charge of disobeying a lawful order to disengage from the fence.

Magistrate Judge John Facciola is presiding over the trial, which was expected to continue through Tuesday and possibly part of the day on Wednesday.

Choi and 12 other LGBT activists attracted national media attention on Nov. 15, 2010, when they handcuffed themselves to the White House fence. About 75 supporters who assembled across the street in Lafayette Park cheered and chanted slogans for LGBT equality while Park Police removed the handcuffs with cable cutters and placed Choi and the other protesters under arrest.

In May of this year, the 12 others who were arrested agreed to a government offer to plead guilty to the charge in exchange for the government dismissing the case against them in six months if the activists don’t get arrested during that period for any reason, including a similar civil disobedience protest.

Choi told reporters at a news conference outside the federal courthouse Monday, after the trial recessed for the day, that he rejected the government’s plea bargain offer because he believes the law and regulation used to arrest him is unconstitutional.

“I believe there is no law that, in the history of this country, abridges freedom of speech, assembly, or the right to protest for redress of grievances, which were clear and made plain by all of the defendants,” he said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Angela George, the prosecutor in the case, called five Park Police officers and a U.S. Park Ranger as government witnesses on Monday. Under questioning from George, they testified that they had no intention of singling out the protesters for their political beliefs or because of their sexual orientation.

Feldman released an e-mail sent to the defense on Friday by George that extended another offer for Choi to plead guilty to the charge in exchange for the dismissal of the case by the government if Choi refrained from getting arrested for the next four months.

Feldman said Choi responded by saying he would accept the offer only on condition that the government issue a public apology to Choi in court on Monday for the arrest and prosecution against him. Feldman said the government rejected the conditions, prompting Choi to turn down the offer.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office said the office would have no comment on the case while the trial is in progress.

Park Police Lt. Robert Lachance, who led a team of officers assigned to arrest the protesters, testified that an assistant solicitor general at the Department of Interior, which has jurisdiction over the Park Police, advised him that the act of chaining oneself to the White House fence violated a federal regulation against actions that pose a threat to public safety, obstruct traffic, and potentially prevent “emergency responders” from carrying out their work.

At the news conference, Feldman said he plans to argue at the trial that Choi’s action at the White House fence did not violate the regulation and statute cited by the Park Police and by prosecutor George.

“It’s uncontroverted that Lt. Choi is no threat to the public safety whatsoever,” said Feldman. “Neither does he obstruct traffic, which is the second part of the regulation.”

Feldman said he would also argue that the regulation used by authorities to arrest Choi applies only to the sidewalk next to the White House fence. He noted that Choi and the other protesters were standing on a masonry ledge that rises above the sidewalk and serves as an anchor for the White House fence.

“It’s very clear that my client was never on the sidewalk,” Feldman said.  “He was on the masonry fence, which is above the sidewalk. And the warnings from Lt. Lachance said, ‘Get off the sidewalk.’ How can you get off the sidewalk if you were never on the sidewalk?”

He said he would also argue that Choi was unable to hear the warning that Lachance made to the protesters through a loudspeaker brought to the scene by Park Police. Lachance testified that he read a scripted message three times ordering the protesters to leave the fence and warning them they would be arrested if they did not comply with that order.

Feldman said Lachance’s warnings were drowned out by loud shouts and chants by Choi and the other 12 protesters handcuffed to the fence as well as by dozens of other protesters assembled in Lafayette Park.

The chants and shouts could be heard in a video recording of the protest that George played in the courtroom as part of a prosecution exhibit for the trial.

“There’s a cacophony of noise all around, and how can you possibly hear Lt. Lachance’s warnings to go away?” Feldman said at the news conference.

He said Choi would testify at the trial as the lead defense witness. One other defense witness, gay activist and former military Capt. Jim Pietrangelo II, was also scheduled to testify, Feldman said.

 

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

Mary’s House founder, CEO retires

Dr. Imani Woody played leading role in opening DC’s first home for LGBTQ seniors

Published

on

Imani Woody and Japer Bowles, director of the Mayor's Office of LGBTQ Affairs, which provides grant funding to Mary's House, pose inside Mary's House following the 2025 ribbon cutting ceremony. Woody has retired as Mary's House's CEO. (Washington Blade photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

The board of directors for Mary’s House for Older Adults, DC’s first official home dedicated to providing affordable housing for LGBTQ seniors, announced on July 7 that its founding president and CEO, Dr. Imani Woody, has retired.

Woody, who holds a PhD in Human Services, is credited with playing a leading role over many years in arranging both city and private funding needed to construct and operate the Mary’s House three-story building located at 401 Anacostia Road, S.E., in the city’s Fort Dupont neighborhood.

The house, which opened in March 2025, with a grand opening ceremony held in May 2025, includes 15 single-occupancy residential units and more than 5,000 square feet of shared communal living space.

“It is with profound gratitude and hearts full of celebration that the board of directors of Mary’s House for Older Adults, DC (MHFOA) announces the retirement of our visionary founder, Dr. Imani Woody, from her role as president and CEO,” the Mary’s House board says in a statement.

“Dr. Woody’s journey with Mary’s House began with her vision and a kitchen table gathering of women with a bold, urgent, and loving vision: to create safe, affirming, affordable housing for LGBTQ/SGL older adults in Washington, DC,” the statement says.

It adds, “What started as a dream has grown into DC’s first affordable LGBTQ+/SGL affirming communal living space for adults 60 and over, a 15-room community residence at 401 Anacostia Road in Southeast Washington.”

The statement says Woody will continue to serve on Mary’s House board.

“The board will be sharing information about the leadership transition process in the coming weeks,” the statement continues. “We are committed to honoring Dr. Woody’s legacy by ensuring Mary’s House continues to thrive and grow in faithful service to LGBTQ/SGL elders experiencing housing insecurity and isolation.”

Continue Reading

Maryland

Va., Md., advocates brace for next fight after Supreme Court sports ruling

Neither state has statewide ban on trans student athletes

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for states to enforce laws barring transgender students from participating on school sports teams consistent with their gender identity, a decision LGBTQ advocates say could encourage additional restrictions across the country.

While neither Maryland nor Virginia currently has a statewide ban on trans student athletes, advocates say the decision could reshape future legislative battles and school policies throughout the region.

Directly following the case, attorneys for trans student athletes spoke out about the case and how detrimental it could be to students.

“This ruling is deeply harmful for transgender women and girls who only asked for the ability to participate in sports with their peers,” said Sasha Buchert, senior attorney and director of the Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project for Lambda Legal, in a press release from the American Civil Liberties Union.

The next step is figuring out how states will move forward, specifically in Maryland and Virginia.

As of right now, neither state has bans on trans athletes in schools. The new Supreme Court decision also does not require states to enact bans, only that bans are allowed if states or school districts choose to enforce them.

According to the ACLU, 27 states have banned trans youth from participating in school sports since 2020. Most of these states also require sex testing, which the organization says is invasive for all female athletes.

Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman said that while she has heard a lot of frustration following the decision, people are ready to take action.

“Families, parents and youth have lived through disappointing changes to the Virginia Department of Education’s model policies for the treatment of transgender students, and the Virginia High School League’s decades-old policy that allowed transgender students an opportunity to play sports with their friends,” Rahaman said in a statement to the Washington Blade.

She believes they are not ready to give up this fight quite yet.

As of now, trans and nonbinary students are protected under Virginia law, and Rahaman wants that to continue.

“This ruling will likely embolden right-wing members of the General Assembly to pursue trans athlete bans, and we will continue to defeat every bill like we have the past five legislative sessions. Now is our time to be proactive,” Rahaman said.

She also calls upon Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger to defend trans youth in Virginia from what she describes as bullies and to continue to stand up to federal attacks on the trans community in general.

For trans students, Rahaman wants to ensure that they continue to know that they belong and have a place in school sports. 

“To the transgender young people watching this decision unfold: you belong on your team, in your school, in your community, and here in Virginia. This ruling does not change that. A single Supreme Court decision cannot define your worth or your future,” Rahaman said.

For people who may be outside the community but want to help, she encourages them to speak with trans and nonbinary people in their community, befriend the families of youth to show their support, and continue to speak up on these issues when needed.

According to ACLU of Virginia, high schooler Eliza Munshi was told she could not compete on the girls’ track team because she was trans. To prove a point, she decided to compete with the boys.

She had previously competed on the girls’s track team before her Virginia school decided to enforce the ban demanded by President Donald Trump. With pink hair and pink makeup, she decided to continue her love for the sport alongside boys. According to Munshi, her entire community rallied for her.

“I did it to prove a point. I knew I could do it. I knew it wouldn’t phase me. My gender itself and that label has been the least important part of my transition: I want to look how I want to look. I want to dress how I want to dress. If you don’t like that, then that’s not my business,” Munshi said.

DOE has launched Title IX probe against Md. school districts

In the weeks leading up to the ruling, multiple Maryland school districts were included in a Title IX probe stating that not enforcing sex-based protections guaranteed by federal law. Currently, there have been no updates on the lawsuit or the district’s decisions.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, the federal probe is based on parent complaints that the school districts were violating a specific Trump-Vance administration addition to Title IX, stating it aligned the sex-based protections “with biological reality, not ideological fantasy.”

According to FreeState Justice, an LGBTQ advocacy group in Maryland, while this is a disappointing ruling to see, they will continue to fight for trans student-athletes in Maryland and want trans youth to know that they belong.

“Every young person deserves the opportunity to participate in school and community life without being singled out because of who they are. These decisions send a harmful message to transgender youth that they are somehow less deserving of that opportunity,” said Phillip Westry, the group’s executive director.

Westry wants to make sure the community knows that their commitment to the organization has not changed and will continue to provide the same legal services they have prior and to advance policy solutions, to ensure “every LGBTQ+ Marylander can live with dignity, safety, and equal opportunity.”

Another issue brought up by trans advocates is the issue of testing women to determine whether they are biologically female or not.

According to Human Rights Watch, as of 2023, World Athletics required cis women with increased testosterone levels to undergo medical procedures to have it reduced to avoid advantages. Other forms of “sex verification” may include genetic testing, screenings of an athlete’s anatomy or chromosomes. 

However, this can become detrimental because not all women have ovaries, a uterus, or XX chromosomes, meaning cisgender women could potentially be included in these bans, depending on how the specific state plans to enforce them.

Continue Reading

Maryland

Eastern Shore school board wants an 18-and-over rule for young adult books

Classics like ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ and ‘Little Women’ might be off limits to most students

Published

on

(Photo by Sumnersgraphics, Inc., via Bigstock)

By LIZ BOWIE | Somerset County’s school board is considering barring students under the age of 18 from reading any young-adult literature in school libraries, essentially restricting all but 12th graders from checking out books written for teens and tweens.

The proposed policy also calls for the superintendent to discipline librarians if “adult” reading material appears in the children’s section.

The policy defines young adult as students over 18. “Young adults are not minors and books suitable for young adults shall be placed on a separate Young Adults library section to reflect age-appropriate literature,” a draft of the policy says.

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.

Continue Reading

Popular