National
Social conservative summit draws anti-gay rhetoric
GOP presidential hopefuls make their case at convention
Rep. Steve King (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Anti-gay rhetoric pervaded a social conservative convention over the weekend where Republican presidential candidates brandished their credentials for the religious right.
Remarks against gays and marriage equality came from several speakers — including lawmakers and conservative activists — at the 2011 Value Voters Summit in D.C., which was hosted by the anti-gay Family Research Council.
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), known of being one of the most anti-gay members of the U.S. House, had particularly harsh words on Friday for LGBT advocates seeking to advance same-sex marriage.
“Marriage is the essential foundation stone for civilization,” King said. “It’s under assault today, ladies and gentlemen. It’s under assault even though it is a sacrament. They have decided they are going to assault it and they are doing so because — not because there is an alterior value out there. They will just attack everything that we believe in.”
The Iowa lawmaker, who spoke fondly of his involvement with the 2010 campaign that ousted three Iowa justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality, ridiculed pro-LGBT activists who protested the bus tour in the campaign against the judges.
“They were on the verge of militant,” King said. “They would come out and they would stand in there and they would scream and yell and curse with the worst profanity I’ve heard anywhere, and I spent my life in the construction business. They were the most unhappy people I ever met that called themselves ‘gay.'”
According to the Iowa Independent, King’s description of the bus tour isn’t consistent with what reporters from the media outlet saw. At one bus stop in Cedar Rapids, for example, same-sex marriage advocates outnumbered those who attended in support of the campaign and chose to mostly stand silently while holding signs.
Bryan Fischer, director of issues analysis for the American Family Association, expressed among the strongest anti-gay views during his summit and said on Saturday he wants a president “who will treat homosexuality not as a political cause at all, but as a threat to public health.”
“Homosexual behavior represents the same threat to human health that injection drug use does,” Fischer said. “I believe we need a president who understands that neither homosexual behavior nor injection drug use represent lifestyles that any responsible government ought to normalize, legitimize, legalize, protect, sanction, or subsidize.”
Criticism from Fischer on Saturday came from one of the GOP presidential hopefuls who spoke before him at the event: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
“We should remember that decency and civility are values too,” Romney said. “One of the speakers who will follow me today has crossed that line I think. Poisonous language doesn’t advance our cause. It has never softened a single heart or changed a single mind.”
Romney didn’t explicitly name anyone in these remarks, but, according to Politico, a Romney campaign official confirmed the former Massachusetts governor was referring to Fischer. It’s unclear whether Romney was chastising Fischer for being anti-gay. Fischer has also had vitriolic words for Islam as well as Mormonism, the religion to which Romney belongs.
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of gay conservative group GOProud, said Romney “is absolutely right” about Fischer and said the anti-gay activist’s comments “are what you would expect from a barbarian like Ahmadinejad not from a man who professes to be a Christian.”
“Gov. Romney should be praised for speaking out courageously against this kind of rhetoric,” LaSalvia continued. “We have a country on the edge of fiscal disaster and it is critical that we have a united conservative movement that can make the case to average Americans about why our vision, our values and our policies are right for this country. The last thing we need is a right wing version of Jeremiah Wright, distracting and dividing us, and that’s exactly what Bryan Fisher is.”
Despite his remarks, Romney also reiterated his pledge to defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
“But marriage is more than a personally rewarding social custom,” Romney said. “It is also critical for the well-being of a civilization. That is why it’s so important to preserve traditional marriage — the joining together of one man and one woman. And that’s why I will appoint an attorney general who will defend the bipartisan law passed by Congress and signed by Bill Clinton — the Defense of Marriage Act.”
The former Massachusetts governor had previously signed a pledge with the National Organization for Marriage promising to defend DOMA against litigation and to back a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Criticism for the Obama administration’s decision to drop the defense of DOMA in court came from several Republican presidential candidates during the Value Voters Summit.
Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, was among those saying he would resume the executive branch’s role in defending the law if elected president. He previously spoke out against Obama for no longer defending DOMA in court, but hasn’t signed the NOM pledge.
“I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman,” Cain said. “And I would not have asked the Department of Justice to not enforce it. I would have asked the Department of Justice to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.”
Cain is wrong is saying that Obama isn’t enforcing DOMA. Although the Justice Department has discontinued defending in DOMA, the administration is still enforcing the law.
House Republican leaders who attended the conference trumpeted their decision to take up defense of DOMA in the Obama administrations. After the administration announced in February it would no longer defend DOMA, the House’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group voted on a party-line basis to take up defense of the law.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) restated his position before his audience on Friday that funds should be directed from the Justice Department to the House to pay for the cost of defending DOMA.
“I’ve raised my hand to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and the laws of our country,” Boehner said. “And if the Justice Department was not going to defend this act passed by Congress, well, then we will. And we have defended the law that the Congress passed. We’re going to take the money away from the Justice Department, who’s supposed to enforce it, and we’ll use it to enforce the law.”
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) echoed praise in his speech for the House’s leadership in taking up defense of DOMA now that the Obama administration isn’t defending the law.
“We will continue and stand up for the Defense of Marriage Act as we fight for victory in the Supreme Court this term,” Cantor said.
This week, a contract modification became public revealing that House Republicans had raised the cost cap to $1.5 million to pay private attorney Paul Clement, a former U.S. solicitor general, to defend DOMA in court.
House Republicans cannot unilaterally redirect congressionally allocated funds from the Justice Department to the House for the purposes of defending DOMA. Both the House and the Senate would have to approve the fund redistribution legislatively through the appropriations process — and such a measure would need Obama’s signature for enactment.
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, criticized House Republican leaders for touting their defense of DOMA — as well as the anti-gay tone of the conference in general.
“This is a clarion call for equality supporters and a sign of just how much influence groups like the Family Research Council hold over anti-LGBT lawmakers,” Solmonese said. “This is a reminder that we have real challenges ahead of us — from repealing DOMA once and for all to making our workplaces safer and more equitable with the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.”
Drew Hammill, spokesperson for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), also rebuked Boehner for extolling his defense of DOMA and said Americans have other priorities.
“While Speaker Boehner does his best to convince the right-wing that both of his feet are firmly planted on the wrong side of history, the American taxpayers are paying the price,” Hammill said. “It’s time for the Speaker to end the hypocrisy of spending $1.5 million to foster discrimination and make more friends on the right, and get back to Americans’ top priority: creating jobs.”
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.
Adams Morgan queer bar broken into and vandalized
‘Things Like This’ embraces formula and plus-size visibility
Calendar: May 23-29
Comings & Goings
New doc chronicles gay hero’s journey from rape to forgiveness
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
WorldPride events round-up
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
