Local
Judge rules against Choi in ‘vindictive’ prosecution claim
Gay activist on trial for arrest over White House protest
A federal judge ruled on Oct. 11 that gay former Army Lt. Dan Choi cannot argue in his ongoing trial that he was targeted for “selective” or “vindictive” prosecution following his arrest last year for chaining himself to the White House fence in a protest against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
In a 17-page decision, Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia overturned an earlier ruling by Magistrate Judge John Facciola that allowed Choi’s lawyers to pursue allegations of selective or vindictive prosecution in the trial, which began Aug. 29.
Lamberth’s decision, among other things, granted a petition by prosecutors for a Writ of Mandamus, a formal and unusual request challenging a ruling of a trial judge by appealing to a higher court or to another judge with greater authority.
Under Lamberth’s decision, Facciola is prohibited from “considering selective or vindictive prosecution as a defense to the merits of the prosecution,” prohibited from “allowing evidence as to either claim” and barred from entertaining any motion filed by Choi to dismiss the case based on selective or vindictive prosecution.
Facciola is presiding over a non-jury trial in which Choi is being prosecuted for a misdemeanor charge of disobeying a lawful police order to disperse from the White House fence. Although the prohibition against Choi’s use of a defense based on selective or vindictive prosecution is a blow to the defense, one of his attorneys, Norman Kent, said Sunday that the defense will move forward on other grounds and that Choi’s defense team remains confident that Choi will be found not guilty.
Choi was the only one of a group of protesters arrested during the November 2010 protest that did not agree to plead guilty to the charge in exchange for having the case dismissed if they weren’t arrested again at the White House within a four-month period.
Through his attorneys, Choi has argued that he had a constitutional right to handcuff himself to the White House fence. The attorneys also have contested the government’s case on a technicality, saying police ordered Choi to disperse from the sidewalk. They note that Choi was standing on an elevated ledge on which the White House fence is attached, not the sidewalk itself and thus Choi was not legally bound to obey the police order.
Lamberth said in his decision that prosecutors were correct in arguing that under longstanding court rules of evidence, a case alleging selective or vindictive prosecution must be initiated in a pre-trial motion, not during the trial itself.
Choi’s attorneys — Kent of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Robert Feldman of New York — have argued that they lacked sufficient evidence of selective or vindictive prosecution prior to the start of the trial. The two said persuasive evidence of a selective-vindictive prosecution only emerged during their cross-examination of government witnesses during the trial itself.
Following strong opposition by the prosecutor in the case, Facciola ruled on Aug. 31 that preliminary evidence existed to show a selective or vindictive prosecution could have occurred against Choi. Facciola ruled that Choi’s lawyers could go forward with using selective-vindictive enforcement as a defense.
Feldman and Kent argued that Choi’s decision to handcuff himself to the White House fence in November 2010 was identical to two prior White House protests in which he and others handcuffed themselves to the fence. They noted that while prosecutors charged Choi in the earlier protests under a local municipal statute that carried no jail time, in the November 2010 protests, they charged Choi under a more stringent federal statute that includes a possible sentence of six months in jail.
Feldman and Kent alleged that prosecutors chose the more stringent statute in the November case because Choi’s protests were embarrassing the Obama administration over the gays in the military issue. They said the harsher prosecution was in retaliation for Choi’s political message that the White House wasn’t moving fast enough to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Angela George, the lead prosecutor in the case, disputed that assertion, saying the government prosecuted Choi for refusing to obey a lawful order by police to move away from the White House fence. She said Choi’s political message was irrelevant to the government’s case and had no role in the decision to prosecute him.
In court briefs, George said prosecutors charged Choi under a more stringent law in the November case because it was the third time in less than a year that he had been arrested for the same illegal conduct and the government has legal discretion to select different statutes or regulations under which to make an arrest in such a case.
Facciola put the trial on hold on Aug. 31 after George said the government would take the unusual step of challenging his ruling through a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus. Under U.S. District Court rules, the court’s chief judge rules on such a petition.
Kent told the Blade on Oct. 16 that following consultation with Choi he and Feldman are strongly considering appealing Lamberth’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. He said Choi’s legal team would make a final decision on whether to file an appeal by Oct. 20, a deadline set by Judge Facciola for the two sides to inform the court whether an appeal will be made or whether the trial will resume.
Choi enjoyed widespread support from LGBT activists when he worked with the LGBT direct action group GetEqual last year in a series of non-violent civil disobedience protests at the White House and other locations to pressure Congress and the Obama administration to push harder for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
But since Obama signed legislation approved by Congress repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and since the repeal took effect on Sept. 20, some activists have questioned the rationale for Choi’s decision to demand a trial in the current case. Some have asked why Choi is contesting the type of civil disobedience arrest that most other protesters acknowledge involves breaking a law and choose to resolve by paying a small fine or agreeing to a plea offer like the one prosecutors made to Choi.
Gay rights attorney and television commentator Mark Levine called non-violent civil disobedience arrests an important and historic tradition in the U.S. civil rights movement made famous by Martin Luther King Jr. in his efforts to end racial discrimination. Levine said the benefit of drawing public attention to an injustice comes from the arrest itself, “not a long drawn out trial that has the potential for wasting court resources that would be better used for something else.”
Choi has said he chose to take his case to trial because he believes his action handcuffing himself to the White House fence is protected by his First Amendment right to free speech and should not be considered an illegal act.
District of Columbia
Drag queens protest Trump at the Kennedy Center
President attended ‘Les Misérables’ opening night on Wednesday
On Wednesday night, four local drag performers attended the first night of the Kennedy Center’s season in full drag — while President Donald Trump, an outspoken critic of drag, sat mere feet away.
Three queens — Tara Hoot, Vagenesis, and Mari Con Carne — joined drag king Ricky Rosé to represent Qommittee, a volunteer network uniting drag artists to support and defend each other amid growing conservative attacks. They all sat down with the Washington Blade to discuss the event.
The drag performers were there to see the opening performance of “Les Misérables” since Trump’s takeover of the historically non-partisan Kennedy Center. The story shows the power of love, compassion, and redemption in the face of social injustice, poverty, and oppression, set in late 19th century France.
Dressed in full drag, the group walked into the theater together, fully aware they could be punished for doing so.
“It was a little scary walking in because we don’t know what we’re going to walk into, but it was really helpful to be able to walk in with friends,” said drag queen Vagenesis. “The strongest response we received was from the staff who worked there. They were so excited and grateful to see us there. Over and over and over again, we heard ‘Thank you so much for being here,’ ‘Thank you for coming,’ from the Kennedy Center staff.”
The staff weren’t the only ones who seemed happy at the act of defiance.
“We walked in together so we would have an opportunity to get a response,” said Tara Hoot, who has performed at the Kennedy Center in full drag before. “It was all applause, cheers, and whistles, and remarkably it was half empty. I think that was season ticket holders kind of making their message in a different way.”
Despite the love from the audience and staff, Mari Con Carne said she couldn’t help feeling unsettled when Trump walked in.
“I felt two things — disgust and frustration,” Carne said. “Obviously, I don’t align with anything the man has to say or has to do. And the frustration came because I wanted to do more than just sit there. I wanted to walk up to him and speak my truth — and speak for the voices that were being hurt by his actions right now.”
They weren’t the only ones who felt this way according to Vagenesis:
“Somebody shouted ‘Fuck Trump’ from the rafters. I’d like to think that our being there encouraged people to want to express themselves.”
The group showing up in drag and expressing themselves was, they all agreed, an act of defiance.
“Drag has always been a protest, and it always will be a sort of resistance,” Carne said, after pointing out her intersectional identity as “queer, brown, Mexican immigrant” makes her existence that much more powerful as a statement. “My identity, my art, my existence — to be a protest.”
Hoot, who is known for her drag story times, explained that protesting can look different than the traditional holding up signs and marching for some.
“Sometimes protesting is just us taking up space as drag artists,” Hoot added. “I felt like being true to who you are — it was an opportunity to live the message.”
And that message, Ricky Rosé pointed out, was ingrained with the institution of the Kennedy Center and art itself — it couldn’t be taken away, regardless of executive orders and drag bans
“The Kennedy Center was founded more than 50 years ago as a place meant to celebrate the arts in its truest, extraordinary form,” said Ricky Rosé. “President Kennedy himself even argued that culture has a great practical value in an age of conflict. He was quoted saying, ‘the encouragement of art is political in the most profound sense, not as a weapon in the struggle, but as an instrument of understanding the futility of struggle’ and I believe that is the basis of what the Kennedy Center was founded on, and should continue. And drag fits perfectly within it.”
All four drag performers told the Washington Blade — independently of one another — that they don’t think Trump truly understood the musical he was watching.
“I don’t think the president understands any kind of plot that’s laid out in front of him,” Vagenesis said. “I’m interested to see what he thinks about “Les Mis,” a play about revolution against an oppressive regime. I get the feeling that he identifies with the the rebellion side of it, instead of the oppressor. I just feel like he doesn’t get it. I feel it goes right over his head.”
“Les Misérables” is running at the Kennedy Center until July 13.
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
Congratulations to Chrys Kefalas and Salah Czapary on their new venture, the Yala Greek Ice Cream Shop, which will open in Georgetown, at 3143 N St. N.W., around July 4.
Kefalas is the CEO and founder, Czapary is the co-founder/director of experience and operations. The third co-founder is Steve Shyn, COO. From what I hear Chrys and Salah will at times both be doing the scooping to the lucky people who stop by their shop. The word “Yala” is a play on the Greek word for “milk,” and fittingly, Yala Greek Ice Cream is made using hand-crafted techniques passed down through three generations of Greek ice cream makers.
Kefalas told the Blade, “This is not frozen yogurt, just inspired by Greek flavors or a trendy twist on gelato. This is true Greek ice cream, finally making its American debut. It is crafted with farm-fresh milk from Maryland, Greek yogurt and honey, fruit preserves from the Mediterranean, and ingredients sourced directly from Greece, Italy, and the Middle East, including premium pistachios and sustainably harvested vanilla.”
The two come from different backgrounds. Kefalas has a family in the restaurant business but is currently the head of the brand division at the National Association of Manufacturers. He is a former Justice Department attorney; worked as Attorney General Eric Holder’s speech writer; Gov. Bob Erlich’s counsel in Maryland; and ran for U.S. Senate in Maryland (endorsed by the Baltimore Sun). Born and raised in Baltimore, he’s a Washingtonian of nine years. He told the Blade, “Yala Ice Cream is a tribute, a legacy, and a love letter across generations.” He spent his early years working in his grandfather’s restaurant in Baltimore, Illona’s. Kefalas hopes, “Just like Greek yogurt changed everything, Greek ice cream is going to set the new standard for ice cream. But, for us, it isn’t just about ice cream; it’s about making my Papou, my grandfather, proud.”
Many people in D.C. know Czapary. He is the son of a Palestinian refugee, and Hungarian immigrant, and a longtime Washington, D.C. resident. Czapary served as a police officer and community engagement leader with the MPD. He then ran for D.C. Council, and although didn’t win, was endorsed by the Washington Post. After that race, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser realized how accomplished he is and asked him to join her administration, where he served as director of the Mayor’s Office of Nightlife and Culture.
Czapary told the Blade, “We’re bringing the first authentic Greek ice cream shop to the U.S., and we’re doing it with heart. We’re building a space where kindness, community, and a scoop of something extraordinary come together. Our Georgetown scoop shop is designed to be a welcoming haven where every guest feels a sense of belonging.”
Delaware
Delaware Senate passes bill to codify same-sex marriage
Measure assigned to House Administration Committee
The bill that would enshrine same-sex marriage into Delaware’s Constitution passed the State Senate Tuesday afternoon.
Senate Substitute Two for Senate Bill 100 passed with a 16 to 5 vote, garnering the two-thirds majority necessary to pass. The bill has been assigned to the House Administration Committee.
SB 100 was introduced in April by Democratic Sen. Russ Huxtable of the sixth district of Delaware. It is the first leg of an amendment to the Delaware Constitution. The act would “establish the right to marry as a fundamental right and that Delaware and its political subdivisions shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender.”
Senate Substitute One was adopted in lieu of the original bill on May 16. SB 100 originally focused exclusively on marriage equality relating to gender and the bill was tweaked to include protection for all classes that fall under Delaware’s Equal Rights Amendment, including race, color, national origin, and sex. Senate Substitute Two was then adopted in lieu of SB 100 on June 5 after being heard by the Senate Executive Committee on May 21.
SS 2 differs from SB 100 by clarifying that the right to marry applies to marriages that are legally valid under the laws of Delaware and that all state laws that are applicable to marriage, married spouses, or the children of married spouses apply equally to marriages that are legally valid. It also removed the need for gender-specific provisions by including gender in the first sentence and revised the language clarifying that the right to marry does not infringe on the right to freedom of religion under Article One of the Delaware Constitution.
“We’re not here to re-litigate the morality of same-sex marriage. That debate has been settled in the hearts and minds of most Americans, and certainly here in Delaware,” Sen. Huxtable said at Tuesday’s hearing. “We are here because the fundamental rights should never be left vulnerable to political whims or the ideological makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Other states such as California, Colorado, and Hawaii have introduced and passed similar bills to protect the right of all people of all genders to marry under state law.
“This bill sends a strong message that Delaware protects its people, that we will not wait for rights to be taken away before we act,” Sen. Huxtable said at the hearing. “Voting in favor of this amendment is not just the legal mechanism of marriage, it’s about affirming the equal humanity of every Delawarean.”
Drag queens protest Trump at the Kennedy Center
Padilla forcibly removed from federal building for questioning DHS secretary
Pride and Progress: Supporting LGBTQ+ Communities in Quitting
Comings & Goings
Indigo Girls coming to Capital One Hall
WorldPride recap: Festival, parade, fireworks, and Doechii
Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups
PHOTOS: WorldPride Parade
PHOTOS: WorldPride Street Festival and Closing Concert
