Connect with us

National

Huntsman finishes 3rd, but loyalists party like they won

Candidate pledges to carry fight to South Carolina

Published

on

Exterior of the Huntsman campaign victory party (Blade photo by Michael Key)

MANCHESTER, N.H. — For Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, Jr., and supporters at his election night party, a third-place showing in the New Hampshire primary felt like a victory.

The candidate’s backers — some who live in the area, some who came from afar to work on his campaign — packed The Black Brimmer American Bar & Grill on Tuesday to show solidarity with the former Utah governor in his presidential bid.

Polls had shown former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney with a commanding lead in the GOP primary, but supporters had hopes that Huntsman would finish in second and have enough momentum to continue through the campaign.

The temperature was almost balmy for a New England winter, but party attendees were clad in sweaters, coats and scarves as they discussed the campaign and enjoyed drinks. Many wore black campaign buttons with a red “H” stamped in the center to showcase support for the candidate.

TVs in the restaurant were tuned to CNN, MSNBC and FOX News broadcasting election results, but the noise in the bar made comments from analysts inaudible.

Speaking to the Washington Blade as they awaited the results, Huntsman supporters at the party said his background as a chief executive of Utah as well as U.S. ambassador to China makes him the ideal candidate.

Shane Feifer, a 19-year-old straight student at George Washington University, said he was drawn to support Huntsman because of his character and foreign policy work.

“I feel like he’s a pragmatic, practical individual who actually thinks about his politics,” Feifer said. “Also, I’m a student of international affairs, so I have to love his international policy. I was in China in April when he was moving out. That’s my area of study, and I’m just very impressed with everything he’s done.”

Having traveled to New Hampshire to support Huntsman, Feifer said he arrived at the election night party after wearing himself out with campaign efforts.

“You can tell by my voice, I’m dying,” Feifer said. “We did rallies, phones, calls, walked the streets waving signs. You know, the whole shebang.”

Huntsman — a favorite among gay Republicans — stands out among other Republican candidates for expressing support for certain gay rights over his previous terms in public service and over the course of his campaign.

The candidate has endorsed civil unions and supported the general notion of moving toward equality. Unlike other candidates, Huntsman made no commitment to back a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage throughout the country.

Josh Sacks, a 24-year-old straight IT consultant who’s volunteering for Huntsman, said the candidate’s position on gay rights was important in his decision to back him.

“I’m not a social conservative by any means,” Sacks said. “I support gay rights. I would even go so far as to say I support gay marriage. The fact that he is open to it, that he does not discriminate and supports civil unions, draws him even closer to that moderate center, and, I think, attracts a lot of independents.”

Don Khoury, a 40-year-old straight business consultant from Boston, said he values the candidate’s consistency on the issues.

“I think he appeals to everybody, whether it’s gender, sexual orientation, nationality, culture,” Khoury said. “He just inspires people, and I think part of the reason he inspires is because he’s honest and transparent. What you see is what you get. He’s not going to say one thing to one group, and something to another.”

Khoury said he’s confident that Huntsman will be able to move forward in the campaign — and could have enough momentum to become the GOP nominee — because of his gay support.

“Any campaign that I have worked on — in Canada, I haven’t worked on many here — where there’s a significant gay population working on the campaign: that guy wins,” Khoury said. “They know how to organize.”

Still, there’s a limit to how far Huntsman will go on gay rights. During a recent debate, Huntsman said he’s a “traditionalist” on marriage and thinks it “ought to be saved for one man and one woman.” Huntsman has also said he thinks the Defense of Marriage Act “serves a useful purpose.”

News outlets declared Romney the winner early in the evening, but the news barely seemed to register among the crowd. For a moment Huntsman shot up to second place, inspiring a cheer from one supporter watching the results. But that moment faded as news outlets declared libertarian Rep. Ron Paul would come in second place, leaving Huntsman with the bronze medal.

But those at the party didn’t lose their zeal. A young campaign worker distributed red signs reading, “Huntsman: Country First.” Supporters waived them in the air as they chanted the campaign slogan, “Country First! Country First!”

A voice from overhead speakers announced the Huntsman family before they went onstage, then, another message came announcing the candidate and his wife, Mary Kaye Cooper, prompting the crowd to cheer.

On stage, Huntsman said his campaign strategy in New Hampshire of directly engaging with state voters was responsible for his showing. The candidate touted at least 170 public events he made in the state and said no other candidate “even came close.”

“We’ve proved the point that this state wants its candidates to earn it the old-fashioned way,” Huntsman said. “That’s on the ground, handshake by handshake, conversation by conversation, vote by vote. We got it done, ladies and gentlemen!”

Huntsman took jibes at President Obama, criticizing the administration for the country’s $15 trillion in debt and continued military engagement overseas.

“Afghanistan is not our nation’s future, and Iraq is not this nation’s future,” Huntsman said. “Our nation’s future is how prepared we are to rise up as the American people and hit head on the competitive challenges of the 21st century.”

Making a reference to his service in China, Huntsman warned that the path the country is following will result in ending America’s role in world leadership.

“This is going to play out in the Pacific Ocean with countries that I have lived in before,” Huntsman said. “And … if we don’t get our act together at home, we will see the end of the American century by 2050, and we are not going to let that happen, are we?”

Huntsman also articulated points about his vision for the country, including term limits for federal lawmakers, prohibiting members of Congress from working as lobbyists right after their tenure and bringing U.S. troops home from Afghanistan.

Praising New Hampshire residents, Huntsman said they come to town halls, even though they aren’t required to do so, because “they believe in a better tomorrow for the United States of America.” An attendee in the audience responded with a shout, “And they believe in Jon Huntsman!” triggering applause from the audience.

But Huntsman concluded with the most important message to his followers that evening: he was going to continue his race onto the next contest in South Carolina.

“Here we sit tonight, ladies and gentlemen, with a ticket to ride and to move on,” Huntsman said. “Here we go to South Carolina!”

Huntsman joined hands with his wife as they both raised their arms overhead in a cheer. Streamers exploded from the ceiling, raining red and white confetti to the ground as Huntsman shook hands with supporters closest to the stage.

The third-place showing also was apparently satisfactory for Tim Miller, Huntsman’s communications director. Following the Huntsman speech, he declared to reporters in the media center, “On Friday, if you would have told me we’d be at 17 percent, I would have said you’re F-ing crazy! F-ing crazy!”

Victory next week for Huntsman there — or even a third place showing — will be a challenge. He’s ranking at the bottom of the pack in polls with less than 5 percent of support in the conservative state and is well behind Romney, who seems poised to take another win.

But that isn’t discouraging his supporters.

Joey Kalmin, a 20-year-old University of Maryland student from Island Park, Ill., said the strong showing in New Hampshire and speech fired him up enough to believe that victory in the primary season — and beyond — will happen for Huntsman.

“He’s going to go all the way to the White House,” Kalmin said. “He’s going to have his right hand raised to God on the west side of the Capitol Building on Jan. 20, 2013. Definitely. No doubt about it. He’s gonna win.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Federal Courts

Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy

Two of seven plaintiffs live in Md.

Published

on

Lambda Legal on April 25 filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of seven transgender and nonbinary people who are challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy.

The lawsuit, which Lambda Legal filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Baltimore, alleges the policy that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers “has caused and is causing grave and immediate harm to transgender people like plaintiffs, in violation of their constitutional rights to equal protection.”

Two of the seven plaintiffs — Jill Tran and Peter Poe — live in Maryland. The State Department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the federal government are defendants.

“The discriminatory passport policy exposes transgender U.S. citizens to harassment, abuse, and discrimination, in some cases endangering them abroad or preventing them from traveling, by forcing them to use identification documents that share private information against their wishes,” said Lambda Legal in a press release.

Zander Schlacter, a New York-based textile artist and designer, is the lead plaintiff.

The lawsuit notes he legally changed his name and gender in New York.

Schlacter less than a week before President Donald Trump’s inauguration “sent an expedited application to update his legal name on his passport, using form DS-5504.”

Trump once he took office signed an executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers. The lawsuit notes Schlacter received his new passport in February.

“The passport has his correct legal name, but now has an incorrect sex marker of ‘F’ or ‘female,'” notes the lawsuit. “Mr. Schlacter also received a letter from the State Department notifying him that ‘the date of birth, place of birth, name, or sex was corrected on your passport application,’ with ‘sex’ circled in red. The stated reason was ‘to correct your information to show your biological sex at birth.'”

“I, like many transgender people, experience fear of harassment or violence when moving through public spaces, especially where a photo ID is required,” said Schlacter in the press release that announced the lawsuit. “My safety is further at risk because of my inaccurate passport. I am unwilling to subject myself and my family to the threat of harassment and discrimination at the hands of border officials or anyone who views my passport.”

Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.

Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.

Lambda Legal represented Zzyym.

The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.

Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January. Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.

A federal judge in Boston earlier this month issued a preliminary injunction against the executive order.  The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven trans and nonbinary people.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

HHS to retire 988 crisis lifeline for LGBTQ youth

Trevor Project warns the move will ‘put their lives at risk’

Published

on

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. appears on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" in April 2024. (Screen capture via YouTube)

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is planning to retire the national 988 crisis lifeline for LGBTQ youth on Oct. 1, according to a preliminary budget document obtained by the Washington Post.

Introduced during the Biden-Harris administration in 2022, the hotline connects callers with counselors who are trained to work with this population, who are four times likelier to attempt suicide than their cisgender or heterosexual counterparts.

“Suicide prevention is about risk, not identity,” said Jaymes Black, CEO of the Trevor Project, which provides emergency crisis support for LGBTQ youth and has contracted with HHS to take calls routed through 988.

“Ending the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline’s LGBTQ+ youth specialized services will not just strip away access from millions of LGBTQ+ kids and teens — it will put their lives at risk,” they said in a statement. “These programs were implemented to address a proven, unprecedented, and ongoing mental health crisis among our nation’s young people with strong bipartisan support in Congress and signed into law by President Trump himself.”

“I want to be clear to all LGBTQ+ young people: This news, while upsetting, is not final,” Black said. “And regardless of federal funding shifts, the Trevor Project remains available 24/7 for anyone who needs us, just as we always have.”

The service for LGBTQ youth has received 1.3 million calls, texts, or chats since its debut, with an average of 2,100 contacts per day in February.

“I worry deeply that we will see more LGBTQ young people reach a crisis state and not have anyone there to help them through that,” said Janson Wu, director of advocacy and government affairs at the Trevor Project. “I worry that LGBTQ young people will reach out to 988 and not receive a compassionate and welcoming voice on the other end — and that will only deepen their crisis.”

Under Trump’s HHS secretary, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the agency’s departments and divisions have experienced drastic cuts, with a planned reduction in force of 20,000 full-time employees. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration has been sunset and mental health services consolidated into the newly formed Administration for a Healthy America.

The budget document reveals, per Mother Jones, “further sweeping cuts to HHS, including a 40 percent budget cut to the National Institutes of Health; elimination of funding for Head Start, the early childhood education program for low-income families; and a 44 percent funding cut to the Centers for Disease Control, including all the agency’s chronic disease programs.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court hears oral arguments in LGBTQ education case

Mahmoud v. Taylor plaintiffs argue for right to opt-out of LGBTQ inclusive lessons

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor, a case about whether Montgomery County, Md., public schools violated the First Amendment rights of parents by not providing them an opportunity to opt their children out of reading storybooks that were part of an LGBTQ-inclusive literacy curriculum.

The school district voted in early 2022 to allow books featuring LGBTQ characters in elementary school language arts classes. When the county announced that parents would not be able to excuse their kids from these lessons, they sued on the grounds that their freedom to exercise the teachings of their Muslim, Jewish, and Christian faiths had been infringed.

The lower federal courts declined to compel the district to temporarily provide advance notice and an opportunity to opt-out of the LGBTQ inclusive curricula, and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the parents had not shown that exposure to the storybooks compelled them to violate their religion.

“LGBTQ+ stories matter,” Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson said in a statement Tuesday. “They matter so students can see themselves and their families in the books they read — so they can know they’re not alone. And they matter for all students who need to learn about the world around them and understand that while we may all be different, we all deserve to be valued and loved.”

She added, “All students lose when we limit what they can learn, what they can read, and what their teachers can say. The Supreme Court should reject this attempt to silence our educators and ban our stories.”

GLAD Law, NCLR, Family Equality, and COLAGE submitted a 40-page amicus brief on April 9, which argued the storybooks “fit squarely” within the district’s language arts curriculum, the petitioners challenging the materials incorrectly characterized them as “specialized curriculum,” and that their request for a “mandated notice-and-opt-out requirement” threatens “to sweep far more broadly.”

Lambda Legal, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, PFLAG, and the National Women’s Law Center announced their submission of a 31-page amicus brief in a press release on April 11.

“All students benefit from a school climate that promotes acceptance and respect,” said Karen Loewy, senior counsel and director of constitutional law practice at Lambda Legal.  “Ensuring that students can see themselves in the curriculum and learn about students who are different is critical for creating a positive school environment. This is particularly crucial for LGBTQ+ students and students with LGBTQ+ family members who already face unique challenges.”

The organizations’ brief cited extensive social science research pointing to the benefits of LGBTQ-inclusive instruction like “age-appropriate storybooks featuring diverse families and identities” benefits all students regardless of their identities.

Also weighing in with amici briefs on behalf of Montgomery County Public Schools were the National Education Association, the ACLU, and the American Psychological Association.

Those writing in support of the parents challenging the district’s policy included the Center for American Liberty, the Manhattan Institute, Parents Defending Education, the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Trump-Vance administration’s U.S. Department of Justice, and a coalition of Republican members of Congress.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular