National
Blumenthal seeks to aid lesbian bi-national couple
Senator wants marriage-based green card application put on hold

The junior senator from Connecticut is asking the Obama administration to hold a green card petition for a British national in same-sex relationship who would be eligible for residency in the United States if not for the Defense of Marriage Act.
In the Nov. 10 letter, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) asks the Department of Homeland Security to hold the application for Kelli Ryan and her wife Lucy Truman. The couple, married in Connecticut in 2010, is seeking a green card through a marriage-based petition so that Truman, a citizen of the United Kingdom, can reside in the United States.
“Kelli and Lucy are active and valuable members of our community,” Blumenthal writes. “The United States stands to lose two highly intelligent and talented women to the United Kingdom if Lucy — a talented clinician, scientist, and valuable member of our community — is not able to stay in the United States.”
MORE IN THE BLADE: US BALKS AT ASYLUM FOR GAY SAUDI DIPLOMAT
A U.S. citizen with a Ph.D. in immunology, Ryan works for a pharmaceutical company on drug discovery research to help combat autoimmune diseases, such as multiple sclerosis. Truman is an ENT surgeon and a post-doctoral fellow at Yale. The couple filed their marriage-based application on Thursday.
Blumenthal asks Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to hold the application on the basis that the Obama administration determined that DOMA is unconstitutional in February and the validity of the anti-gay law remains in question.
“The question of DOMA’s constitutionality and validity as applied to the lawful marriages of same-sex couples in states like Connecticut has yet to be decided by the federal courts and Congress,” Blumenthal writes. “Until such a final determination is made, I ask that you withhold judgment on the validity of this petition from lawfully married Connecticut citizens.”
Under current immigration law, straight Americans can sponsor their foreign spouses for residency in the United States. But the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, prohibits gay Americans from taking the same action for their same-sex spouses.
During a conference call Thursday, Ryan said the lack of her ability to sponsor her spouse for residency has been burdensome in decisions such as buying furniture, financial planning, and having children.
“There are some very simple practical everyday aspects of lives that are affected,” Ryan said. “For example, it’s really difficult to do any sort of planning — even for the short term — let alone the long term.”
Truman isn’t currently in danger of deportation from the country. She said during the conference call she’s currently able to stay within the United States on a work-based visa. However, that visa must be renewed every two years.
Blumenthal’s letter isn’t the first time lawmakers have urged DHS to hold marriage-based green applications in abeyance for bi-national gay couples. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and 47 other House members in April sent a letter to DHS asking for relief. A similar letter from Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and 11 other senators was sent to DHS in the same month.
The Department of Homeland Security didn’t respond to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on the most recent letter from Blumenthal. The Obama administration has said even though it believes DOMA is unconstitutional and won’t defend the law in court, the law will still be enforced as long as it remains on the books.
Blumenthal joins Immigration Equality is seeking to take action for Ryan and Truman. The LGBT immigration group is representing the couple in their bid to remain together in the United States.
Read the full text of Blumenthal’s letter here:
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
Washington DC, 20393
Dear Madam Secretary,
I respectfully request that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in particular, hold the spousal petition of Kelli Ryan and her wife Lucy Truman in abeyance pending a final determination of the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The Department of Justice (DOJ) has already indicated that it believes the law to be unconstitutional, and has declined to defend it in court. Moreover, the question of DOMA’s constitutionality and validity as applied to the lawful marriages of same-sex couples in states like Connecticut has yet to be decided by the federal courts and Congress. Until such a final determination is made, I ask that you withhold judgment on the validity of this petition from lawfully married Connecticut citizens.
In a letter dated April 14, 2011 addressed to you and Attorney General Holder by Representative Lofgren and 47 other members of the United States House of Representatives, similar relief was requested for all married couples of the same sex seeking spousal immigration sponsorship. These 48 Representatives asserted that holding same-sex spousal petitions in abeyance would not disrespect existing law, but would rather, “prevent the potentially irreparable harm that would be caused by application of a law that is currently under review by the courts and the U.S. Congress.” Until a final determination of the status of this law is made, the status quo should be preserved.
Also in April, Senator Kerry and 11 other Senators wrote to you and Attorney General Holder asking that you hold marriage-based petitions in abeyance pending legislative or judicial resolution of the constitutionality of DOMA. In a joint response, you and the Attorney General indicated that both DHS, including relevant sub-agencies such as USCIS, and DOJ exercise discretion in their treatment of individual cases. In my opinion, the couple in the present case deserves such review and should have their spousal petition held in abeyance.
Kelli Ryan and Lucy Truman met in Scotland in 2000. They entered into a civil union in the United Kingdom in 2006 and married in Connecticut in 2010. Kelli is a United States citizen with a Ph.D. in immunology. Lucy, who hails from the United Kingdom, is an ENT surgeon with an M.D. Ph.D. Kelli works for a pharmaceutical company in Connecticut, and is deeply engaged in drug discovery research to help combat deadly autoimmune diseases, with a particular focus on multiple sclerosis. Lucy is a post-doctoral fellow at Yale. Kelli and Lucy are active and valuable members of our community. Having been lawfully married in Connecticut, they now seek to establish long-term roots in our state. Kelli would like to sponsor Lucy for a family-based immigration visa in the hopes of making Connecticut their permanent home. The United States stands to lose two highly intelligent and talented women to the United Kingdom if Lucy – a talented clinician, scientist, and valuable member of our community – is not able to stay in the United States.
In the wake of Attorney General Holder’s February 23, 2011 letter to Congress announcing that the President will no longer defend DOMA in federal court, couples like Kelli and Lucy face great uncertainty about their treatment under the law. Historically, the Department of Homeland Security has responded to such uncertainty by taking administrative actions to ensure the preservation of the status quo until a resolution has been achieved. For instance, in July 2009, DHS temporarily deferred action with regard to the widows of American citizens and their minor children to await impending legislative action that would provide those individuals with a path toward permanent resident status. A similar approach should be taken with regard to section 3 of DOMA as applied to lawful marriages of same-sex couples.
Ultimately, I believe DHS should establish a mechanism allowing couples similarly situated to Kelli and Lucy to have their green card applications held in abeyance. In the absence of such a mechanism, however, I ask that you act in this particular case to provide temporary relief to Kelli Ryan and Lucy Truman by holding their spousal petition in abeyance in an effort to avoid future harm to this couple and to the State of Connecticut. I appreciate your time and attention to this important matter.
U.S. Federal Courts
Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups
Lambda Legal filed the lawsuit in federal court

A federal judge on Monday blocked the enforcement of three of President Donald Trump’s executive orders that would have threatened to defund nonprofit organizations providing health care and services for LGBTQ people and those living with HIV.
The preliminary injunction was awarded by Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in a case, San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, filed by Lambda Legal and eight other organizations.
Implementation of the executive orders — two aimed at diversity, equity, and inclusion along with one targeting the transgender community — will be halted pending the outcome of the litigation challenging them.
“This is a critical win — not only for the nine organizations we represent, but for LGBTQ communities and people living with HIV across the country,” said Jose Abrigo, Lambda Legal’s HIV Project director and senior counsel on the case.
“The court blocked anti-equity and anti-LGBTQ executive orders that seek to erase transgender people from public life, dismantle DEI efforts, and silence nonprofits delivering life-saving services,” Abrigo said. “Today’s ruling acknowledges the immense harm these policies inflict on these organizations and the people they serve and stops Trump’s orders in their tracks.”
Tigar wrote, in his 52-page decision, “While the Executive requires some degree of freedom to implement its political agenda, it is still bound by the constitution.”
“And even in the context of federal subsidies, it cannot weaponize Congressionally appropriated funds to single out protected communities for disfavored treatment or suppress ideas that it does not like or has deemed dangerous,” he said.
Without the preliminary injunction, the judge wrote, “Plaintiffs face the imminent loss of federal funding critical to their ability to provide lifesaving healthcare and support services to marginalized LGBTQ populations,” a loss that “not only threatens the survival of critical programs but also forces plaintiffs to choose between their constitutional rights and their continued existence.”
The organizations in the lawsuit are located in California (San Francisco AIDS Foundation, Los Angeles LGBT Center, GLBT Historical Society, and San Francisco Community Health Center), Arizona (Prisma Community Care), New York (The NYC LGBT Community Center), Pennsylvania (Bradbury-Sullivan Community Center), Maryland (Baltimore Safe Haven), and Wisconsin (FORGE).
U.S. Supreme Court
Activists rally for Andry Hernández Romero in front of Supreme Court
Gay asylum seeker ‘forcibly deported’ to El Salvador, described as political prisoner

More than 200 people gathered in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday and demanded the Trump-Vance administration return to the U.S. a gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who it “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador.
Lindsay Toczylowski, president of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a Los Angeles-based organization that represents Andry Hernández Romero, is among those who spoke alongside U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Human Rights Campaign Campaigns and Communications Vice President Jonathan Lovitz. Sarah Longwell of the Bulwark, Pod Save America’s Jon Lovett, and Tim Miller are among those who also participated in the rally.
“Andry is a son, a brother. He’s an actor, a makeup artist,” said Toczylowski. “He is a gay man who fled Venezuela because it was not safe for him to live there as his authentic self.”
(Video by Michael K. Lavers)
The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”
President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The Trump-Vance administration subsequently “forcibly removed” Hernández and hundreds of other Venezuelans to El Salvador.
Toczylowski said she believes Hernández remains at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT. Toczylowski also disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.
“Andry fled persecution in Venezuela and came to the U.S. to seek protection. He has no criminal history. He is not a member of the Tren de Aragua gang. Yet because of his crown tattoos, we believe at this moment that he sits in a torture prison, a gulag, in El Salvador,” said Toczylowski. “I say we believe because we have not had any proof of life for him since the day he was put on a U.S. government-funded plane and forcibly disappeared to El Salvador.”
“Andry is not alone,” she added.
Takano noted the federal government sent his parents, grandparents, and other Japanese Americans to internment camps during World War II under the Alien Enemies Act. The gay California Democrat also described Hernández as “a political prisoner, denied basic rights under a law that should have stayed in the past.”
“He is not a case number,” said Takano. “He is a person.”
Hernández had been pursuing his asylum case while at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego.
A hearing had been scheduled to take place on May 30, but an immigration judge the day before dismissed his case. Immigrant Defenders Law Center has said it will appeal the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which the Justice Department oversees.
“We will not stop fighting for Andry, and I know neither will you,” said Toczylowski.
Friday’s rally took place hours after Attorney General Pam Bondi said Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who the Trump-Vance administration wrongfully deported to El Salvador, had returned to the U.S. Abrego will face federal human trafficking charges in Tennessee.
National
A husband’s story: Michael Carroll reflects on life with Edmund White
Iconic author died this week; ‘no sunnier human in the world’

Unlike most gay men of my generation, I’ve only been to Fire Island twice. Even so, the memory of my first visit has never left me. The scenery was lovely, and the boys were sublime — but what stood out wasn’t the beach or the parties. It was a quiet afternoon spent sipping gin and tonics in a mid-century modern cottage tucked away from the sand and sun.
Despite Fire Island’s reputation for hedonism, our meeting was more accident than escapade. Michael Carroll — a Facebook friend I’d chatted with but never met — mentioned that he and his husband, Ed, would be there that weekend, too. We agreed to meet for a drink. On a whim, I checked his profile and froze. Ed was author Edmund White.
I packed a signed copy of Carroll’s “Little Reef” and a dog-eared hardback of “A Boy’s Own Story,” its spine nearly broken from rereads. I was excited to meet both men and talk about writing, even briefly.
Yesterday, I woke to the news that Ed had passed away. Ironically, my first thought was of Michael.
This week, tributes to Edmund White are everywhere — rightly celebrating his towering legacy as a novelist, essayist, and cultural icon. I’ve read all of his books, and I could never do justice to the scope of a career that defined and chronicled queer life for more than half a century. I’ll leave that to better-prepared journalists.
But in those many memorials, I’ve noticed something missing. When Michael Carroll is mentioned, it’s usually just a passing reference: “White’s partner of thirty years, twenty-five years his junior.” And yet, in the brief time I spent with this couple on Fire Island, it was clear to me that Michael was more than a footnote — he was Ed’s anchor, editor, companion, and champion. He was the one who knew his husband best.
They met in 1995 after Michael wrote Ed a fan letter to tell him he was coming to Paris. “He’d lost the great love of his life a year before,” Michael told me. “In one way, I filled a space. Understand, I worshiped this man and still do.”
When I asked whether there was a version of Ed only he knew, Michael answered without hesitation: “No sunnier human in the world, obvious to us and to people who’ve only just or never met him. No dark side. Psychology had helped erase that, I think, or buffed it smooth.”
Despite the age difference and divergent career arcs, their relationship was intellectually and emotionally symbiotic. “He made me want to be elegant and brainy; I didn’t quite reach that, so it led me to a slightly pastel minimalism,” Michael said. “He made me question my received ideas. He set me free to have sex with whoever I wanted. He vouchsafed my moods when they didn’t wobble off axis. Ultimately, I encouraged him to write more minimalistically, keep up the emotional complexity, and sleep with anyone he wanted to — partly because I wanted to do that too.”
Fully open, it was a committed relationship that defied conventional categories. Ed once described it as “probably like an 18th-century marriage in France.” Michael elaborated: “It means marriage with strong emotion — or at least a tolerance for one another — but no sex; sex with others. I think.”
That freedom, though, was always anchored in deep devotion and care — and a mutual understanding that went far beyond art, philosophy, or sex. “He believed in freedom and desire,” Michael said, “and the two’s relationship.”
When I asked what all the essays and articles hadn’t yet captured, Michael paused. “Maybe that his writing was tightly knotted, but that his true personality was vulnerable, and that he had the defense mechanisms of cheer and optimism to conceal that vulnerability. But it was in his eyes.”
The moment that captured who Ed was to him came at the end. “When he was dying, his second-to-last sentence (garbled then repeated) was, ‘Don’t forget to pay Merci,’ the cleaning lady coming the next day. We had had a rough day, and I was popping off like a coach or dad about getting angry at his weakness and pushing through it. He took it almost like a pack mule.”
Edmund White’s work shaped generations — it gave us language for desire, shame, wit, and liberation. But what lingers just as powerfully is the extraordinary life Ed lived with a man who saw him not only as a literary giant but as a real person: sunny, complex, vulnerable, generous.
In the end, Ed’s final words to his husband weren’t about his books or his legacy. They were about care, decency, and love. “You’re good,” he told Michael—a benediction, a farewell, maybe even a thank-you.
And now, as the world celebrates the prolific writer and cultural icon Edmund White, it feels just as important to remember the man and the person who knew him best. Not just the story but the characters who stayed to see it through to the end.