National
Lesbian who fought workplace discrimination ‘honored’ to attend SOTU
Kilker to join handful of guests in first lady’s box
Lorelei Kilker (left) with her partner Sara Nelson (photo courtesy Kilker)
The invitation to witness the State of the Union address on Tuesday alongside first lady Michelle Obama came as a surprise to a lesbian analytical chemist who last year fought alleged workplace sex discrimination.
In an interview with the Washington Blade, Lorelei Kilker, 31, of Brighton, Colo., said she learned she was invited to attend the speech upon receiving a call from a White House official on Sunday.
“It was a Sunday and the middle of the day,” she said with a laugh. “They left a message on my phone from someone who said, ‘This is the White House.’ I was very shocked. I didn’t think that anything like this would happen. I was honored and shocked.”
One of a handful of guests that have been selected to sit in the first lady’s box in the House gallery, Kilker will watch President Obama deliver his speech at 9 p.m. before a joint session of Congress.
Kilker described the feeling of being able to sit next to first lady Michelle Obama to watch the president as he gives his speech as “overwhelming.”
“You see the president and you see the first lady on TV,” Kilker said. “You recognize them, but I never in a million years would have thought I would have the opportunity to see them in person. It’s pretty great.”
Kilker said she’ll be traveling to D.C. with her partner of three-and-a-half years, Sarah Nelson, who’s 33 and works at Dick’s Sporting Goods. They have two children, ages four and seven. However, Kilker will be attending the speech on her own.
The message that Kilker hopes to hear from President Obama on Tuesday night: “getting America back together, becoming united.”
Asked whether she’d like to hear something from Obama on LGBT issues, such as an endorsement of same-sex marriage, Kilker replied, “I think that that’s important. There have been steps, but we need something stronger.”
What would Kilker want to say to Michelle Obama if they have an opportunity to chat? Kilker said she’d commend the first lady for being an admirable person.
“The only thing I would say to her is that I think she’s a positive and strong female role model, and the Obama administration has done a lot for civil rights as opposed to other administrations,” Kilker said.
Kilker was invited to attend the State of the Union address after she received monetary relief in an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission case that investigated alleged sex discrimination she faced at while employed at the Western Sugar Cooperative.
According to an EEOC statement from when the case was resolved in October, EEOC found Western Sugar denied women training and promotions, gave them less desirable work assignments and segregated positions by gender at its Ft. Morgan, Colo., facility. Additionally, the company allegedly denied year-round employment and paid lower wages to women.
Western Sugar has denied any wrongdoing and maintains it’s an equal opportunity employer, but agreed to resolve the matter through EEOC’s reconciliation process.
But Kilker contends that women “had certain jobs they were allowed to have, and there were certain jobs that they were not allowed to have.”
“The jobs that women had were mediocre, they paid less,” Kilker said. “There was really no opportunity for advancement. The male jobs were higher-wage, promotions, things like that.”
When she tried to enter one of these “male jobs,” Kilker said she was repeatedly denied the opportunity despite her record.
“The management would come up to me and promise me that they were going to do this, they were going to do this,” Kilker said. “Then, they would go back and say, ‘No we’re not going to do this. No we’re not going to this. We changed our mind.”
Additionally, Kilker said management at the company singled her out for sexual harassment that made her “working life miserable” until she eventually quit her job.
“My family received phone calls saying that I was doing sexual activities in order to do jobs, and things like that,” Kilker said. “It got pretty disgusting.”
Kilker said the discrimination she faced was the result of her gender and not her sexual orientation. She said she doesn’t believe her former employer knew she was a lesbian.
On the grounds that the alleged discrimination was in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Kilker filed charges on behalf of herself and other women at the company.
As a result of arrangements that were achieved through a cooperative process between the employer and EEOC, Kilker and others involved in the class-action case received $550,000 in relief. Further, Western Sugar agreed to remedial relief such as training for all employees and appointed an internal representative who’ll report to the EEOC to monitor the company’s employment practices for the next three years.
Kilker said she received “the majority share” of the $550,000, although she couldn’t recall the exact portion of that amount she received.
“I was so happy,” Kilker. “It had taken so many years that I just had kind of gotten to the point where I was over it. And then, the investigator at the EEOC really got into it, and it was just amazing how far they came with that.”
According to the White House, EEOC has obtained almost $50 million in monetary relief through administrative enforcement for victims of sex-based wage discrimination since the creation of the President’s Equal Pay Task Force in January 2010. Additionally, EEOC obtained changes to workplace practices that benefit more than 250,000 workers, and filed five cases including sex-based wage discrimination claims.
Although EEOC was able to resolve the issue, Kilker said more advancements are necessary to protect workers against discrimination.
Kilker said she supports the idea of Obama taking action administratively to bar discrimination in the workplace. Some LGBT rights advocates have urged the president to issue an executive order preventing federal dollars from going to companies without LGBT-inclusive workplace non-discrimination protections.
“I think that’s a great idea,” Kilker said. “It’s just another step in the right direction, and that’s what we need.”
But Kilker won’t be the only LGBT person attending the State of the Union. The other lesbian invitee is Air Force Col. Ginger Wallace, who’s 43 and lives in McLean, Va. She’s currently training to deploy to Afghanistan in the spring through the Afghanistan-Pakistan Hands program.
The Washington Blade reported in December on Wallace’s partner Kathy Knopf participating in her “pinning-on” promotion ceremony, the first reported instance of such an event happening with a same-sex partner since the lifting of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
On Tuesday, Wallace told the Blade that she and her partner are “honored and humbled” to represent LGBT people and families who’ve served in the armed forces.
“We’re just amazed that we were chosen to do that,” Wallace said. “We’re just humbled to represent this unique section of people. There are really are a lot of exceptional gays and lesbians who serve in our military.”
If she has an opportunity to speak with Michelle Obama, Wallace said she’d thank the first lady — as well as second lady Jill Biden — for their work leading the national campaign called “Joining Forces,” which was launched in April to support military families through public service outreach and partnerships.
“They have worked tirelessly to increase support for military families, ensure that military families are taken care of,” Wallace said. “That’s important work, especially today. After 10 years of conflict, 10 years of deployment — that’s taken its toll.”
Wallace said she hopes Obama during his speech will the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as one of the accomplishments of his administration.
“I hope it is highlighted as a success, and I think, more importantly, I hope it is received by the audience as a success,” Wallace said. “I hope this is seen as the success I think the administration thinks it is.”
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.
PHOTOS: Helen Hayes Awards
Laverne Cox, Reneé Rapp, Deacon Maccubbin named WorldPride grand marshals
House passes reconciliation with gender-affirming care funding ban
PHOTOS: D.C. Trans Pride
Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
WorldPride events round-up
Pope Leo XIV: Family based on ‘stable union between a man and a woman’
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
