National
Catching up with gay locals in New Hampshire
Some pledge to support Obama; others favor Romney

MANCHESTER, N.H. — Chatting with gay and lesbian locals, one thing they seem to agree on is their newly won marriage rights shouldn’t factor into presidential politics.
Otherwise, customers at Manchester’s gay bars were divided over their pick for president, with some favoring President Obama and others choosing among the GOP field.
Two patrons at Element Lounge expressed their support for Obama as they enjoyed drinks with friends and others danced to local amateurs singing on karaoke night.
Alicia Appleton, a lesbian factory worker, said she plans to vote for Obama in the Democratic primary even though he’s the only serious candidate on the ticket for that party.
“If he’s on the ballot, I’ll vote for him,” Appleton said. “Obama is a person, I believe, that listens to both sides of the spectrum — whether you’re against something or for something. He sits and he listens to both sides, and then he tries to compromise what should be done about issues.”
As for what she thinks about the Republicans, Appleton said, “I don’t pay attention to the Republicans because … I believe they’re one-sided — they don’t listen to what the people have to say; they just listen to what their beliefs are. Like what they think is right and not what the people want.”
Barry Leger, 27, a personal service representative at the Catholic Medical Center, said he’s likely to cast his ballot in the Republican primary for a candidate who’s considered a tremendous long-shot: Fred Karger.
“I’m not sure if I’m even going to vote at this time, but if I were to vote, Fred Karger would get my vote because he’s the first gay Republican to be running for office, so I would stand up for that,” Leger said.
Leger said he’s never voted in a primary before, but voted for Obama in the general election in 2008 and expressed satisfaction with Obama’s performance over the last three years.
“I think he’s done the best job that he can because he was handed a lot of shit,” Leger said. “The only thing he could do in four years was put Band-Aids on it. There’s no way he could fix it in four years, but I think he’s trying to do the best he can, and I will probably vote for him again because the Republicans just have such an ancient way of thinking.”
When the general election rolls arounds in November, Leger said he’ll likely vote for Obama because he’ll want to do “anything to keep a Republican out of office.”
“I feel a lot of the Republican candidates are very hypocritical because they all talk about how there’s going to be a change and freedom for all Americans, but they say they’re trying to repeal gay marriage in states like New Hampshire,” Leger said. “As a gay American, why would I vote for somebody who stands for that?”
At The Breezeway bar a few blocks down Elm Street, another gay man said he plans to stick with Obama as he and others downed drinks while Madonna’s “Vogue” played in the background.
Bob Sheridan, a gay 57-year-old retired server, expressed similar support for Obama — saying he backed him in the 2008 Democratic primary.
“He came into a lot of shit,” Sheridan said. “His inaugural address, he was like, ‘You know it’s gonna take time.’ I knew it’s gonna take time, and a lot of people are upset that it’s taking too long. I mean, gimme a break. Everything’s starting to turn around now.”
Sheridan accused Republicans of withholding credit that Obama deserves for his accomplishments. Noting that recent numbers from the Department of Labor showed an increase of 200,000 jobs, Sheridan said the Republican response was “Well, that wasn’t because of Obama.”
“Republicans have done everything to kill Obama,” Sheridan said. “And I think a lot of Americans are naive, and they go by what they hear, and they’ve got like five, six, seven Republican candidates running for the nomination all slamming him. And I think they have a habit of just thinking what they hear and then not looking at the total picture.”
On gay rights, Sheridan said he’s satisfied with Obama’s accomplishments. But his view on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is a different story. A former Massachusetts resident, Sheridan sees a big change in how Romney is approaching the LGBT community today.
“He ran for governor courting the gay community, and he won,” Sheridan said. “Now he’s looking for the conservative vote, so he’s against the gay community. I mean, I’ve seen it being from Massachusetts and moving into New Hampshire. I’m like, who’s he trying to fool? The Republican conservatives? The independents? I don’t know.”
In a debate on Sunday, Romney said in response to a question that he favors “full rights” for gay people. But his campaign seemed to contradict that statement later in the week when it disavowed a 2002 Pride flier issued by Romney’s campaign that read, “All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual preference.”
Obama doesn’t support marriage rights for gay couples, but Sheridan said he isn’t disappointed by that position because he’s lukewarm on the marriage issue.
“I don’t think there’s any need,” Sheridan said. “If there’s two guys who are really interested and want to be married, fine. Civil union, marriage, fine. I, myself, I don’t think I could ever marry another man.”
But the exception among those who are supportive of Obama was Ryan Lantagne, a gay 27-year-old bill collector. Smoking with friends outside Element Lounge, Lantagne, a Democrat, said he thinks Obama has been a failure.
“I feel he failed the country in a few ways,” Lantagne said. “I know he had a lot to handle when it came to taking over for President Bush, but I think that he didn’t do a very good job of anything. The job numbers are still down, and a lot of the country is in bad standing, so I just hope something can give and Obama wasn’t the option and is still not the option.”
Lantagne said he hasn’t decided which candidate to support and may not even vote in the primary, but said he’s leaning toward Romney.
“He’s raised a very political family,” Lantagne said. “He’s strong-willed. He knows what he’s doing. He’s got a very good outlook for the country. … It’s really tough to tell who’s going to be the most supportive candidate if elected.”
The bar patrons also weighed in on potential repeal of the state’s same-sex marriage law. The legislature is likely to vote this month on repealing the law, and the Republican supermajority may have enough votes to override Gov. John Lynch’s (D) promised veto of the measure.
Leger said he was particularly unhappy with the Republican candidates’ decision to weigh in on possible repeal of New Hampshire’s same-sex marriage law.
“Candidates like Mitt Romney and all the others who want to take it away from us,” Leger said. “I don’t understand how it affects them because they’re heterosexuals, but if two gay people marry, why does it affect them? They can’t give a straight answer.”
Romney and Rick Perry have expressed support for repealing the marriage law. The White House hasn’t commented on the repeal effort.
Sheridan said he doesn’t think there will be enough support in the state to undo the law because “there’s too many gay Republicans in New Hampshire.”
“There a lot of Republicans in New Hampshire that are for gay rights,” Sheridan said. “I have two daughters. One of them is a Republican. One of them is a Democrat. My Republican daughter believes in gay rights.”
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.
The White House
Trump travels to Middle East countries with death penalty for homosexuality
President traveled to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and United Arab Emirates

Homosexuality remains punishable by death in two of the three Middle East countries that President Donald Trump visited last week.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar are among the handful of countries in which anyone found guilty of engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations could face the death penalty.
Trump was in Saudi Arabia from May 13-14. He traveled to Qatar on May 14.
“The law prohibited consensual same-sex sexual conduct between men but did not explicitly prohibit same-sex sexual relations between women,” notes the State Department’s 2023 human rights report, referring specifically to Qatar’s criminalization law. “The law was not systematically enforced. A man convicted of having consensual same-sex sexual relations could receive a sentence of seven years in prison. Under sharia, homosexuality was punishable by death; there were no reports of executions for this reason.”
Trump on May 15 arrived in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates.
The State Department’s 2023 human rights report notes the “penalty for individuals who engaged in ‘consensual sodomy with a man'” in the country “was a minimum prison sentence of six months if the individual’s partner or guardian filed a complaint.”
“There were no known reports of arrests or prosecutions for consensual same-sex sexual conduct. LGBTQI+ identity, real or perceived, could be deemed an act against ‘decency or public morality,’ but there were no reports during the year of persons prosecuted under these provisions,” reads the report.
The report notes Emirati law also criminalizes “men who dressed as women or entered a place designated for women while ‘disguised’ as a woman.” Anyone found guilty could face up to a year in prison and a fine of up to 10,000 dirhams ($2,722.60.)

Trump returned to the U.S. on May 16.
The White House notes Trump during the trip secured more than $2 trillion “in investment agreements with Middle Eastern nations ($200 billion with the United Arab Emirates, $600 billion with Saudi Arabia, and $1.2 trillion with Qatar) for a more safe and prosperous future.”
Former President Joe Biden traveled to Saudi Arabia in 2022.
Saudi Arabia is scheduled to host the 2034 World Cup. The 2022 World Cup took place in Qatar.