National
A second shot at marriage in Maine
State LGBT group hopes to bring issue before voters

The head of the statewide LGBT rights group in Maine is excited about the prospects for a November ballot measure that would legalize same-sex marriage.
Betsy Smith, executive director of Equality Maine, said during a Washington Blade interview on Saturday that a win in Maine on the initiative āĀ the first voter-initiated pro-LGBT measure to appear on a state ballot anywhere in the country āĀ would be “hugely significant.”
“Our opponents are always saying that we can win marriage in the courts and we can win marriage in the legislature … but when it comes to the people, we can never win marriage,” Smith said. “That’s the biggest thing. If we win at the ballot, it will be through the support of Mainers, of Americans, and that’s a really, really important statement that Americans are now believing that the freedom to marry is what should be the law of the country.”
Last week, Equality Maine ā as well as allied groups Freedom to Marry and Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders ā submitted more than 105,000 signatures to Secretary of State Charles Summers, Jr., for certification of a ballot measure legalizing same-sex marriage. The number of names required for certification is 57,000, and Smith said she has significantly more than enough valid names to qualify for the ballot.
“There’s not a problem with the signatures,” Smith said. “We have, we think, around 85,000 to 90,000 valid signatures. So, in terms of validating, that’s not an issue.”
The secretary of state has 30 days to review the signatures and validate them, so the office will certify the measure by Feb. 26. Once the measure is certified, it won’t go directly to the ballot but to the Maine Legislature.
The legislature has three options. One would be passing the initiative on its own, an unlikely scenario that would result in the measure becoming law and the legalization of marriage rights for gay couples. Another, which Smith said she’s betting on, is the legislature indefinitely postponing action on the measure, sending it to voters after the lawmakers recess for the year in April.
But another option for the legislature that has drawn concern is the placing of an alternate question before voters alongside the proposition to legalize same-sex marriage. For example, the legislature could approve language asking voters to approve civil unions as an alternative to marriage, or same-sex marriage with extreme religious exemptions.
But Smith said she thinks the legislature won’t pursue this path, which could derail the effort to legalize same-sex marriage in Maine, because neither opponents nor supporters of same-sex marriage will want to go down that road.
“You’d have to have majority support for whatever you want to pass, so if it’s for civil unions, they would need to have a majority support civil unions,” Smith said. “Start thinking about where those votes come from. Well, the pro-marriage folks are not going to vote for it because we don’t want them to, and the anti-equality folks don’t support even civil unions for us, so when you start to add up how they get majority support, even though it’s a Republican legislature, it’s just really highly unlikely.”
But once the voter-initiated ballot measure is certified, the legislature can do nothing to kill it, so same-sex marriage would be on the ballot in Maine one way or the other.
November 2012 won’t be the first time that Maine voters have had to decide on the question of same-sex marriage. In 2009, Maine voters rejected a same-sex marriage law, signed by former Gov. John Baldacci (D), in a referendum by a vote of 53 percent.
Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, said movement in favor of same-sex marriage within the American public at large and having President Obama at the top of the ticket bodes well for LGBT advocates the second time around at the ballot.
“While Maine is unusual politically, and can go back and forth between the parties and has an independent streak, it is very likely to back Obama again this fall,” Sabato said. “That probably helps passage. On the whole, I’d say it will be a tough fight, but prospects for approval are no worse than 50-50, and potentially could be better if the pro-marriage campaign is well run.”
One small change from 2009 that works in favor of passage is the change in the title for the measure. In 2009, the law was called “An Act To End Discrimination in Civil Marriage and Affirm Religious Freedom.” But the proposed title for the 2012 initiative is “AnĀ Act to Allow Marriage Licenses for Same-Sex Couples and Protect Religious Freedom.” Smith said research found this language played better with voters.
She said sheĀ believes an effective campaign will cost between $4 and $5 million. Although 2012 will be a competitive year and donors will have to make choices to give to the president, congressional races and ballot initiatives in other marriage states, Smith said her organization’s calculations “show we can raise that amount of money.”
But anti-gay forces are already making preparations to block these efforts.
Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, in a statement last week pledged to fight the initiative and derided efforts to legalize marriage equality in Maine after the state rejected it in 2009.
“NOM intends to vigorously fight this attempt by same-sex marriage advocates to impose gay marriage in Maine,” Brown said. “Maine voters rejected gay marriage barely more than two years ago. What part of āno’ don’t gay marriage advocates understand?”
But Smith offered a litany of reasons why the outcome of a ballot measure in 2012 would be different. She said her organization made the decision to go to the ballot in December after it started gathering signatures last summer.
Among them, Smith said, are internal polls showing that support for same-sex marriage is somewhere between 53 and 54 percent.
“We have been running a public education initiative that we ramped up significantly in 2011, including knocking on 110,000 doors, having conversations with around 40,000 Mainers about why marriage matters in an effort to engage them in what we call a persuasion conversation,” Smith said.
Smith added her organization looked at theĀ strength of the coalition andĀ the willingness of volunteers to collect 105,000 names to put same-sex marriage on the ballot, which she said “indicated to us that volunteers are really excited and happy to get back involved.”
“So those are the … things that make 2012 different and led us to make the decision that we have the window of opportunity to win,” Smith concluded.
National
Federal judge blocks Trump’s order restricting gender-affirming care for youth
Seven families with transgender, nonbinary children challenged directive

A federal judge on Thursday issued a temporary restraining order that blocks President Donald Trump’s Jan. 29 executive order restricting access to gender-affirming health care for transgender people under age 19.
The order by Judge Brendan Hurson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, came in response to a request from the plaintiffs in a lawsuit, filed on Feb. 4, against Trump’s directive.
The plaintiffs are seven families with trans or nonbinary children. They are represented by PFLAG National, GMLA, Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Maryland, and the law firms Hogan Lovells and Jenner & Block.
Hurson’s temporary restraining order will halt enforcement of Trump’s order for 14 days, but it can be extended. This means health care providers and medical institutions can provide gender-affirming care to minor patients without the risk of losing federal funding.
Families in the lawsuit say their appointments were cancelled shortly after the executive order was issued. Hospitals in Colorado, Virginia, and D.C. stopped providing prescriptions for puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and other interventions for trans patients as they evaluated Trump’s directive.
The harms associated with suddenly withholding access to medical care for these patients were a major focus of Thursday’s hearing on the plaintiffs’ request for the temporary restraining order.
The president’s āorder seems to deny that this population even exists, or deserves to exist,ā Hurson said, noting the elevated risk of suicide, poverty, addiction, and other hardships among trans people.
National
Trumpās trans erasure arrives at National Park Service
Fate of major 2016 LGBTQ Theme Study unclear

President Trumpās efforts at erasing trans identity intensified this week as employees at the National Park Service were instructed to remove the āTā and āQā from āLGBTQā from all internal and external communications.
The change was first noticed on the website of the Stonewall National Monument; trans people of color were integral to the events at Stonewall, which is widely viewed as the kickoff of the modern LGBTQ rights movement. The Stonewall National Monument is the first U.S. national monument dedicated to LGBTQ rights and history.
Reaction to that move was swift. New York City Council member Erik Bottcher wrote, āThe Trump administration has erased transgender people from the Stonewall National Monument website. We will not allow them to erase the very existence of our siblings. We are one community!!ā
But what most didnāt realize is that the removal of the āTā and āQā (for transgender and queer) extends to all National Park Service and Interior Department communications, raising concerns that the move could jeopardize future LGBTQ monuments and project work.
The Blade reached out to the National Park Service for comment on the trans erasure and received a curt response that the agency is implementing Trumpās executive order āDefending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Governmentā as well as agency directives to end all DEI initiatives.
The question being debated internally now, according to a knowledgable source, is what to do with a massive LGBTQ Theme Study, which as of Feb. 14 was still available on the NPS website. In 2014, the Gill Foundation recognized an omission of historic LGBTQ sites in the nationās records, and the organization made a grant to the National Park Service to commission a first-of-its-kind LGBTQ Theme Study, which was published in 2016. It was a landmark project that represented major progress for the LGBTQ community in having our contributions included in the broader American story, something that is becoming increasingly difficult given efforts like āDonāt Say Gayā laws that ban the teaching of LGBTQ topics in schools.
A source told the Blade that National Park Service communications staff suggested that removing chapters of the 2016 Theme Study that pertain to transgender people might placate anti-trans political appointees. But one employee pushed back on that, suggesting instead that the entire Theme Study be removed. Editing the document to remove one communityās contributions and perspective violates the academic intent of the project, according to the source. A final decision on how to proceed is expected soon.
Meanwhile, a protest is planned for Friday, Feb. 14 at noon at Christopher Park in New York City (7th Ave. S. and Christopher Street). The protest is being planned by staff at the Stonewall Inn.
āThe Stonewall Inn and The Stonewall Inn Gives Back Initiative are outraged and appalled by the recent removal of the word ātransgenderā from the Stonewall National Monument page on the National Park Service website,ā the groups said in a statement. āLet us be clear: Stonewall is transgender history. Marsha P. Johnson, Sylvia Rivera, and countless other trans and gender-nonconforming individuals fought bravely, and often at great personal risk, to push back against oppressive systems. Their courage, sacrifice, and leadership were central to the resistance we now celebrate as the foundation of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement.ā
National
Victory Institute executive director speaks about movement response to Trump 2.0
Advocacy groups will lead efforts to push back against anti-LGBTQ administration

President Donald Trumpās issuance of a series of executive orders targeting transgender rights and LGBTQ-inclusive diversity programs on the first day of his second term was a clear signal of the new administrationās appetite for going after queer and gender diverse people.Ā
The Jan. 20 directives also brought into focus the extent to which organizations in the LGBTQ movement, particularly those whose work includes impact litigation, will be responsible for protecting the communities they serve from harmful and discriminatory laws and policies over the next four years.
At a critical time that is likely to test the limits of their capacity, these groups are facing challenges that could restrict their access to critical resources thanks in part to the conservative movementās opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion in both government and the private sector.
LGBTQ organizations expected federal funding for their work would dry up when the incoming administration took over, given that Trump and his allies made no secret of their plans to aggressively reshape the government including by ridding U.S. agencies of all DEI-related programs, policies, and activities.Ā
Trump went even further, however, issuing orders to categorically freeze the disbursement of government funds tied to preexisting grants and contracts, while threatening investigations of private companies for āillegalā policies and practices related to DEI.
Partly in response to pressure from conservative leaders and activists, over the past couple of years companies have increasingly backed away from DEI efforts including, especially, support for LGBTQ communities and causes.
Coupled with the loss of federal funding, a decline in corporate giving to LGBTQ organizations could have devastating impacts on the communities they serve, potentially leading to cutbacks in programs and services core to their missions or imperiling their efforts to push back against a hostile regime.
āContinuing to fund our work is obviously top of mind for everyone right now,ā Elliot Imse, executive director of the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute, told the Washington Blade during an interview last week.Ā Ā
The move by many private companies away from supporting LGBTQ equality has been surprising, Imse said, but āwhat we know is itās a very uncertain environment for corporations right now, and they are feeling out these new realities.ā
On the other hand, the moment also presents an opportunity to remind businesses that commitments to DEI are good for their bottom line while rewarding companies that resist pressure to abandon their LGBTQ customers, employees, and communities, Imse said.
āThere’s a lot of courageous corporations out there, too, right now, a lot that are continuing to step up. And we need to be grateful; we need to be making purchasing decisions as a community with those corporations in mind. Every corporation that has reaffirmed its commitment to us, we need to go out and support them.ā
āWhile Victory Institute ā like all LGBTQ+ organizations ā is concerned about the current fundraising environment, we have a programmatic plan in place that directly addresses the realities of what is happening across the country right now,ā he said, with programs to support LGBTQ elected officials serving everywhere from small municipal offices to the most powerful positions in government.Ā
A diverse pipeline of out leaders from diverse backgrounds is the best bulwark āagainst attacks on our equality and democratic backsliding,ā Imse said. āWe have a very robust programmatic plan for 2025 ā and we need to execute on it at this critical moment.ā
While the Victory Institute is currently looking for funding to support the organizationās international work to compensate for the loss of federal grants, Imse said the group plans to expand U.S.-based programs, maximizing their reach at a time when this work is especially critical.Ā Ā
āWeāre going to be in more cities than ever before. Weāre going to have a larger training presence than ever before, including our LGBTQ+ Public Leadership Summits, which are specifically designed to inspire and recruit LGBTQ+ people to run for office. It is essential folks reject the demoralization of the current moment and that we have more boots on the ground to support those willing to step up and run.ā
He added, āwe are hopeful that we will be able to raise the money we need to carry these programs out, and we believe we can make the case to donors that these programs are an essential path forward.ā
At the same time, Imse acknowledged that LGBTQ groups, including the Victory Institute, are in a difficult position at the moment and āweāll absolutely have to adjust if we see a downturn in fundraising throughout the year.ā
āit’s going to be an uphill battle, there’s no doubt about that. Like all other organizations, we’re going to watch the numbers and adjust as necessary,ā he said, adding, āthe people we have at our organization are what makes our organization strong ā their expertise, their relationships, the networks that they’ve built.ā
And while he said āmaking sure that we meet the moment is something that keeps me up at night,ā Imse stressed that “figuring out how to balance the reality we are in versus optimism is something that is on everyone’s mind as you talk to LGBTQ+ community members, your staff, your fundersā who recognize that āyou must have hope, because if people back away from our equality at this moment, it’ll be much worse than even the situation weāre in right now.ā
There is no shortage of good reasons to hold onto hope, Imse said. āOur movement has always thrived in moments of crisis. While weād prefer no crisis, it refocuses us. It motivates us. And oftentimes leads to breakthroughs that we may not have had otherwise. It destroys complacency. It instills urgency.ā
After Trump took office and the new Congress was sated with GOP majorities in both chambers, LGBTQ groups whose work includes lobbying or government relations understood their ability to influence policy at the federal level would be limited, at least until Democratic allies have the opportunity to retake control of the House in 2026.Ā
The Victory Institute was especially well positioned to shift away from Washington, Imse said, because state legislatures, city councils, and school boards have always been the organizationās ābread and butterā and the elections for these positions ātruly matterā even if they are less āhigh profileā than U.S. congressional races.Ā
āWhen we’re talking about opportunities to make progress in the near future, opportunities to launch a successful offense and defense, it is in these legislative bodies,ā he said. āAnd they arguably make more impact on individualsā lives than the federal government does.ā
Imse added this is especially true with regard to opportunities for legislative action to support LGBTQ Americans and defend their rights, which is unlikely to happen on Capitol Hill for a ālong time.ā
It is especially important now that LGBTQ communities and organizations support each other, he said.
LGBTQ movement groups, particularly those with international focus, āhave been phenomenal in bringing us together and trying to find out whatās been done, keeping us up to date on potential litigation opportunities, as well as looking for funders that are willing to step up at this absolutely critical moment in our movementās history,ā Imse said.
āWe also need our community to step up in terms of supporting these organizations,ā he said, āfinancially through resources and capacity and giving their time, because that’s the only way we’re going to be able to move forward effectively.ā
It is āimportant that our community members remain active, engaged, and involved, and that our LGBTQ+ media continues to ensure our stories are being told,ā Imse said, adding, āEspecially right now, this is an entire movement ecosystem that is working to make sure whatever backsliding is about to occur is not permanent.ā
-
District of Columbia5 days ago
Booz Allen withdraws as WorldPride corporate sponsor
-
a&e features2 days ago
D.C.ās most eligible queer singles
-
District of Columbia3 days ago
Protests against Trump executive orders to take place in D.C. on Thursday
-
Politics2 days ago
Trump picks Richard Grenell as interim Kennedy Center executive director