Connect with us

National

Supreme Court won’t hear NOM disclosure case

Anti-gay group has no further avenue for appeal

Published

on

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

The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Monday it won’t hear a case brought by the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage challenging a Maine law requiring the organization to reveal its donors.

The high court posted a notice on its website indicating it wouldn’t hear the case, known as National Organization for Marriage v. McKee, without providing comment. The decision means NOM no longer has any avenue of appeal in the case.

NOM, among the most high-profile organizations opposing same-sex marriage, asked the Supreme Court to take the case after the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the constitutionality of the Maine disclosure laws.

In 2009, NOM contributed a total of $1.8 million to Stand for Marriage Maine and was one of the top fundraisers for the political action committee, which funded efforts for a Maine referendum that nullified the same-sex marriage law in the state.

According to Maine law, any organization that makes expenditures of more than $5,000 to influence a ballot question must register and file reports with the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices.

The anti-gay group contested this law on the basis that NOM shouldn’t be defined as a political action committee and because the statutory scheme of the law was unconstitutionally vague, but the First Circuit denied these arguments. The high court decision on Monday not to take up the case means the appellate court ruling will stand.

NOM didn’t respond to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on the Supreme Court decision or a sense of timing for when they would disclose their donors.

LGBT advocates praised the decision by the Supreme Court and said it’ll keep NOM more transparent in its efforts to stop the advancement of same-sex marriage.

Fred Sainz, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president of communications, said the Supreme Court’s decision means the court has “once again allowed state disclosure laws to stand.”

“Even conservative judges have rejected NOM’s pleas for secrecy and misguided attempts to thumb its nose at donor disclosure laws,” Sainz said. “At some point, this fringe anti-LGBT group has to realize that it can’t just pick and choose which laws it follows and which laws it ignores.”

Fred Karger (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Fred Karger, who’s running as an openly gay candidate for the Republican nomination for president, helped bring NOM’s practices to the attention of the Maine Ethics Commission in 2009. He said he’s “thrilled” with the Supreme Court decision.

“They finally will be forced to reveal their donor names,” Karger said. “That is one of my goal in life, to keep them transparent, which is a very tough assignment because that is the opposite approach they take.”

NOM’s has a history of questionable practices with disclosure of its donors. The group has raised more than $284,000 on behalf of Minnesota’s anti-gay marriage amendment, but listed zero donors as the source of the cash. The organization has said that the contributions came from “membership dues,” which allows it to avoid disclosing donors under a loophole in Minnesota law.

However, according to Think Progress, NOM doesn’t have a membership structure by which it can collect dues, at least not publicly, and didn’t list membership dues as a source of revenue in its 2010 tax returns.

Jennifer Pizer, legal director of the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the Supreme Court decision isn’t surprising because it takes up few petitions and the Maine disclosure law isn’t uncommon.

Pizer said NOM failed to advance their case because it couldn’t substantiate that donors would face threats if their names were public, nor could it successfully make the argument that the Citizens United ruling, which allows for unlimited political contributions from corporations and unions, allows campaign donors to give anonymously.

“It long has been believed that public sunshine on the identities of large donors to campaigns is important for voters assessing both candidates and ballot measures, and that our constitutionally protected rights to participate in the political process are not rights to do so secretly,” Pizer said.

Pizer added future litigation against disclosure laws may occur in the future, but groups like NOM “would want to find different legal theories than the arguments rejected in this case.”

“Today’s ruling probably means that everyone, including NOM, will need to abide by the same campaign finance disclosure rules during the upcoming campaigns as Maine’s voters this fall most likely will be deciding again on marriage for same-sex couples,” Pizer said.

[h/t] SCOTUSblog

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

California

Calif. governor ‘encouraged’ by new state guidelines for trans student-athletes

Gavin Newsom responded to California Interscholastic Federation announcement

Published

on

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, center, at the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Governor Gavin Newsom is “encouraged” by a new policy announced Tuesday by the California Interscholastic Federation which critics say basically erases the concept that finishing first matters. 

The CIF’s “pilot entry process” will give high school girls who lost to a transgender student-athlete at last weekend’s qualifying meet an invitation to compete at the state championship next weekend.

“CIF’s proposed pilot is a reasonable, respectful way to navigate a complex issue without compromising competitive fairness,” said Newsom spokesperson Izzy Gardon in a statement. “The governor is encouraged by this thoughtful approach.”

The change came hours after President Donald Trump threatened to pull “large scale federal funding” from the state if officials allowed trans athletes to compete according to their gender identity. 

The CIF statement did not address Trump’s comments or whether the pilot entry process was in response to his social media post. 

KCRA quoted a source as saying the policy had been in the works for weeks. The station also reported judges will score trans athletes separately from cisgender competitors, so there will ultimately be three winners: a cisgender male winner, a cisgender female winner, and a trans student-athlete winner. 

“The CIF believes this pilot entry process achieves the participation opportunities we seek to afford our student-athletes,” the statement by CIF said.

CIF did not clarify if this pilot entry process will continue beyond this year’s championship, or how judges will determine whether an athlete is trans. A spokesperson for CIF did not immediately respond to these questions by the news media.

The trans athlete in question, AB Hernandez, 16, qualified to advance to the May 30-31 finals in Clovis, Calif., by winning regional competitions in long jump and triple jump on May 15. Now, she also will be competing against those same cisgender student-athletes she already beat. 

In an interview with the California news outlet Capital & Main earlier this month, Hernandez refuted claims that she has an unfair advantage because she was presumed to be male at birth. She finished eighth in the high jump and third in the long jump at a recent meet. 

“All I thought was, I don’t think you understand that this puts your idiotic claims to trash,” Hernandez told the paper. Of her critics, who booed so loudly at a recent meet they caused a false start at one event, Hernandez said, she said she pays them no mind. 

“There’s nothing I can do about people’s actions, just focus on my own,” Hernandez told Capital & Main. “I’m still a child, you’re an adult, and for you to act like a child shows how you are as a person.”

The paper reported two of her most stringent opponents confronted the teen’s mother at a recent meet. “What a coward of a woman you are, allowing that,” said local superintendent candidate Sonja Shaw to Nereyda Hernandez. “How embarrassing!”

Shaw was at a meet with Jessica Tapia, an ex-gym teacher who was fired by Hernandez’s high school for refusing to respect trans and nonbinary students’ pronouns. They are part of the Save Girls Sports association that opposes inclusion of transgender female students in girls’ and women’s sports.

As of press time, Trump has not responded on social media to CIF’s announcement. 

Podcaster and anti-trans inclusion activist Riley Gaines, a former college swimmer who tied for fifth place with a trans athlete in a 2022 national championship meet, denounced the CIF’s new policy, claiming “boys would still be competing against girls.”

For his part, Newsom has already gone on the record against trans female athletes participating in girls’ and women’s sports, calling it an “issue of fairness.” That statement drew the ire of advocacy organizations, including Human Rights Campaign. Although Trump said he planned to speak to the governor, Newsom’s office did not say whether Newsom and the president had spoken.

As Politico reported, Republican lawmakers across California denounced the CIF’s new policy, some claiming it did not go far enough to “safeguard the interests of all female athletes.” 

A spokesperson for the Jurupa Unified School District, where the trans student attends school, noted that the athlete is competing fairly and in accordance with the law.

“Both state law and CIF policy currently require that students be permitted to participate in athletic teams and competitions consistent with their gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the pupil’s records,” said spokesperson Jacquie Paul. 

“We remain committed to following the law as written and ensuring that all students are granted the rights afforded to them in a safe and welcoming environment.”

Continue Reading

Federal Government

So far, virtually no acknowledgement of Pride month by federal gov’t

Trump-Vance administration proclaimed ‘no more drag shows’ at Kennedy Center

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Just a few days from the start of June, there has been virtually no acknowledgment of Pride month by federal government agencies this year, a striking departure from recent policy and practice under the Biden-Harris administration and even under President Donald Trump’s first term.

Some limited and more localized observances have been preserved or renewed in 2025, for example by the U.S. courts’ webpage celebrating history-making LGBTQ jurists like Judges Deborah A. Batts and J. Paul Oetken of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, and by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, which notes on its website plans to actively participate in WorldPride 2025.

The paltriness of Pride this year comes pursuant to several policy changes under Trump 2.0 such as executive orders narrowing the definition of gender to exclude trans and nonbinary people and banning activities related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, which have led to agency-wide changes including the removal of LGBTQ focused website content and dissolution of “affinity groups.”

Many of these actions came to light in the first few months of Trump’s second term. For example, in January the Associated Press reported a memo from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency indicating that observances related to Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Pride Month, Holocaust Days of Remembrance, and other cultural or historical annual events would be paused.

While it remains to be seen whether and to what extent the White House, federal government, and Congress will acknowledge Pride month in 2025, in 2024:

  • • At the end of May, President Joe Biden issued a proclamation declaring June LGBTQ Pride Month, as he had done for the previous three years of his administration
  • • The U.S. Senate, then under Democratic control, introduced a resolution recognizing June 2024 as LGBTQ Pride Month
  • • Federal agencies across the whole of government participated in Pride activities, and at a high level — for instance, then-U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken hosted a Pride month convening focused on U.S. foreign policy, national security, inclusive development, and human rights
  • • Actions in June, which in many cases were coordinated via LGBTQ employee resource groups or affinity groups, included celebrations of LGBTQ individuals — for example, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration toasted those who made significant contributions to economic growth, while the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office hosted a “Proud Innovation 2024” event, highlighting the accomplishments of LGBTQ innovators, entrepreneurs, and small business owners who utilize intellectual property to grow their businesses and mentor others in their communities.
  • Agencies also provided support indirectly — for example, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission sponsored attorneys who wished to represent the FTC at LGBTQ Pride events organized by various bar associations

The Washington Post pointed to some of the challenges facing organizers of WorldPride as they plan festivities in D.C. throughout early June: “This year, the LGBTQ+ celebration is being held in the backyard of a government that has targeted transgender rights and made major cuts to HIV prevention programs. At the Kennedy Center, President Donald Trump has promised “NO MORE DRAG SHOWS, OR OTHER ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA.”

On June 14, Trump is set to preside over a military parade in Washington commemorating the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, his 79th birthday, and Flag Day, in a celebration that will feature 6,600 soldiers from at least 11 corps and divisions nationwide and 150 military vehicles, including 28 M1 Abrams tanks.

Continue Reading

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

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

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.

Continue Reading

Popular