National
Perry ‘would be comfortable’ reinstating ‘Don’t Ask’
GOP hopeful says Obama repealed ban to please political base

Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry said Tuesday he “would be comfortable” reinstating the ban openly gay military service known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” if elected president.
The three-term Texas governor and GOP presidential hopeful made the remarks during a morning interview with ABC News’ Christine Amanpour when asked if he would have been uncomfortable serving alongside openly gay troops in his capacity as an airman.
“If an individual, in their private life, makes a decision about their sexuality from the standpoint of how they’re going to practice it, that’s their business,” Perry said. “I don’t think that question needs to be asked. That’s the reason ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was, in fact, a workable policy, and that’s where I would be comfortable with our country going back to that.”
Despite Perry’s characterization of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” many gay service members were involuntarily outed by a third-party and discharged from service under the law without making any statements about their sexual orientation. For example, Maj. Mike Almy, a former Air Force communications officer, said he never made a statement that was gay while in military service, but was nonetheless expelled from the armed forces in 2006 after his superior obtained private emails revealing his sexual orientation.
Perry said he would “comfortable” reinstating “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” after Amanpour asked him several times whether he would put the gay ban back in place.
The first time he was asked about it, Perry suggested he would discuss the matter with military leaders, saying “you go back and sit down with your commanders in the field and have that conversation,” and maintained the gay ban “worked very well.”
The 18-year-old law prohibiting openly gay service in the military, enacted by Congress in 1993, was lifted from the books on Sept. 20 after President Obama signed repeal legislation in December.
Perry said Obama repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to “make a political statement” and chided the president for “using our men and women in the military as a tool” for that end.
“What I agree with is that the president of the United States [was] changing policy that was working well — and to do it while we were at war in two different theaters, I think, was irresponsible,” Perry said. “And I truly believe he did it to respond to his political base.”
Other Republican presidential hopefuls who’ve said they would reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and former U.S. senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania. Perry’s remarks in the interview mark the first time he’s weighed in on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” since he’s sought election to the White House.
LGBT advocates pounced on Perry for being open to bringing back “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and said the candidate’s views represent a misunderstanding of the military and the American public.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the National Log Cabin Republicans, said Perry “sidesteps the importance of individual liberty” by backing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and for asserting it was a “workable uniform policy.”
“As a veteran of the Iraq campaign and current Army reserve officer, I can attest [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] was a hindrance to servicemember integrity, readiness, security and was a tremendous waste of tax dollars,” Cooper said.
Cooper noted a bipartisan majority in Congress legislatively ended “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” last year and said suggesting that law should be restored “is a no-go and demonstrates a lack of understanding key national security issues.”
“We must have a president who will lead our military in the 21st century, not cling to a failed relic of the last,” Cooper said. “Gov. Perry should remain battle focused on the economy if he wants Republicans to a win in 2012.”
Fred Sainz, vice president of communications at the Human Rights Campaign, called Perry’s remarks “nothing more than red meat for Republican primary voters.”
“Gov. Perry knows better which is what makes his statement so appalling,” Sainz said. “Over 70 percent of the American public favors open service and military brass have said the integration of gay and lesbian service members has been a non-issue. Why would he want to mess with those two facts? The answer is simple. Because a return to discrimination appeals to a very narrow cross-section of voters that he’s going after.”
Once the GOP front-runner, Perry has fallen in the polls and remains unpopular with the Republican electorate with which he’s seeking support. A USA Today/Gallup published Tuesday found former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain tied with 21 percent of support, followed by U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich with 12 percent and Perry with 11 percent.
A transcript of the exchange between Amanpour and Perry follows:
Christine Amanpour: As president, would you reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — even if commanders, as they have done, have said that openly serving gays and lesbians have not many any difference to operational security or any kind of morale?
Rick Perry: I think you go back and sit down with your commanders in the field and have that conversation. I think “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” worked very well, and —
Amanpour: So you would reinstate it?
Perry: I think it worked very well.
Amanpour: But would you reinstate it?
Perry: I think the idea the president of the United States wanted to make a political statement using our men and women in the military as the tool for that was irresponsible.
Amanpour: Do you think it was a political statement?
Perry: Absolutely.
Amanpour: So many allied governments — whether it’s Israel, whether it’s England or France — have done that and they say they have strengthened their armed forces, and you remember, during the Iraq war, there were so many gay people who couldn’t serve in desperately needed positions and that harmed national security. You would really reinstate it?
Perry: I don’t necessarily agree with your premise. What I agree with is that the president of the United States [was] changing policy that was working well — and to do it while we were at war in two different theaters, I think, was irresponsible. And I truly believe he did it to respond to his political base.
Amanpour: You were in the Air Force. Would you have been uncomfortable serving with openly gay members of the Air Force?
Perry: I don’t ask that question. I think that’s the issue right there. If an individual, in their private life, makes a decision about their sexuality from the standpoint of how they’re going to practice it, that’s their business. I don’t think that question needs to be asked. That’s the reason “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was, in fact, a workable policy, and that’s where I would be comfortable with our country going back to that.
Watch the video here (via Think Progress)
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.