National
Plaintiffs seek to expedite gay troops’ case against DOMA
Attorneys want earlier deadline, narrower focus

SLDN advocates rally in favor of 'Don't Ask' repeal late in 2010 prior to the vote. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
Attorneys representing gay troops in a lawsuit contesting the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act are asking the court to impose an earlier deadline for House Republicans to intervene in the case.
In a motion dated April 11, plaintiffs ask the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts to shorten the deadline to April 20 for the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group to respond to the case. As it stands, the current deadline for House Republicans to intervene is April 28.
“To help expedite the case and narrow the issues for trial, plaintiffs ask that the court set an April 20, 2012 deadline for potential intervenors to seek intervention in this case,” the motion states.
The lawsuit, McLaughlin v. United States, was filed by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network before the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts in October on behalf of gay troops seeking benefits for their spouses. Chadbourne & Parke LLP is serving as pro-bono counsel in the case.
Plaintiffs say they are seeking an earlier deadline in the case because they want to resolve issues of intervention before a decision is reached in the DOMA cases pending before the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Oral arguments took place in those cases April 4.
“The plaintiffs hope that this case will move quickly once the First Circuit rules in those cases,” the motion states. “Accordingly, plaintiffs would like the court to set an earlier deadline for any third-parties to intervene, so that any issues concerning whether intervention should be permitted can be addressed and decided prior to the First Circuit’s decision in Massachusetts and Gill.”
David McKean, SLDN’s legal director, said the filing was made to speed up the process.
“This filing today was made in order to help expedite the case and resolve issues surrounding BLAG’s intervention sooner rather than later,” McKean said.
Attorneys representing BLAG didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the request to shorten the deadline.
The Obama administration last year stopped defending DOMA in court, but the House, under the direction of Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) took up defense of the law after BLAG voted on a 3-2 party line basis to defend the statute in the administration’s stead. Boehner’s attorneys are expected to intervene in the McLaughlin case as they’ve done with other cases.
Christopher Man, counsel at Chadbourne & Parke LLC, told the Blade on March 10 BLAG was likely to intervene soon in the lawsuit, but that intervention has yet to take place. According to the motion, attorneys for BLAG advised plaintiffs on March 7 that intervention would take place in the “next day or so.”
In a letter dated Feb. 17, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder notified Congress the administration won’t defend other statutes barring spousal benefits from flowing to gay troops, such as Title 38, in addition to DOMA. The letter created the opportunity for Boehner’s attorney to respond to the case.
The parties involved in the case previously agreed to move the deadline from intervention from Feb. 28 to April 28. But that agreement was made before oral arguments took place in the two DOMA cases before the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
The McLaughlin case isn’t the only pending litigation against DOMA in which the plaintiffs are gay troops seeking spousal benefits. On Feb. 1, the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit in a California federal court on behalf of Tracey Cooper-Harris, a lesbian veteran seeking benefits for her spouse. Boehner’s attorneys intervened last month against plaintiffs in the case.
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
Congratulations to Gil Pontes III on his recent appointment to the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors, Fla. Upon being appointed he said, “I’m honored to join the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors at such an important moment for our community. In my role as Executive Director of the NextGen Chamber of Commerce, I spend much of my time focused on economic growth, fiscal sustainability, and the long-term competitiveness of emerging business leaders. I look forward to bringing that perspective to Wilton Manors — helping ensure responsible stewardship of public resources while supporting a vibrant, inclusive local economy.”
Pontes is a nonprofit executive with years of development, operations, budget, management, and strategic planning experience in 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and political organizations. Pontes is currently executive director of NextGen, Chamber of Commerce. NextGen Chamber’s mission is to “empower emerging business leaders by generating insights, encouraging engagement, and nurturing leadership development to shape the future economy.” Prior to that he served as managing director of The Nora Project, and director of development also at The Nora Project. He has held a number of other positions including Major Gifts Officer, Thundermist Health Center, and has worked in both real estate and banking including as Business Solutions Adviser, Ironwood Financial. For three years he was a Selectman, Town of Berkley, Mass. In that role, he managed HR and general governance for town government. There were 200+ staff and 6,500 constituents. He balanced a $20,000,000 budget annually, established an Economic Development Committee, and hired the first town administrator.
Pontes earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth.
Kansas
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
A new Kansas bill requires transgender residents to have their driver’s licenses reflect their sex assigned at birth, invalidating current licenses.
Transgender people across Kansas received letters in the mail on Wednesday demanding the immediate surrender of their driver’s licenses following passage of one of the harshest transgender bathroom bans in the nation. Now the American Civil Liberties Union is filing a lawsuit to block the ban and protect transgender residents from what advocates describe as “sweeping” and “punitive” consequences.
Independent journalist Erin Reed broke the story Wednesday after lawmakers approved House Substitute for Senate Bill 244. In her reporting, Reed included a photo of the letter sent to transgender Kansans, requiring them to obtain a driver’s license that reflects their sex assigned at birth rather than the gender with which they identify.
According to the reporting, transgender Kansans must surrender their driver’s licenses and that their current credentials — regardless of expiration date — will be considered invalid upon the law’s publication. The move effectively nullifies previously issued identification documents, creating immediate uncertainty for those impacted.
House Substitute for Senate Bill 244 also stipulates that any transgender person caught driving without a valid license could face a class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. That potential penalty adds a criminal dimension to what began as an administrative action. It also compounds the legal risks for transgender Kansans, as the state already requires county jails to house inmates according to sex assigned at birth — a policy that advocates say can place transgender detainees at heightened risk.
Beyond identification issues, SB 244 not only bans transgender people from using restrooms that match their gender identity in government buildings — including libraries, courthouses, state parks, hospitals, and interstate rest stops — with the possibility for criminal penalties, but also allows for what critics have described as a “bathroom bounty hunter” provision. The measure permits anyone who encounters a transgender person in a restroom — including potentially in private businesses — to sue them for large sums of money, dramatically expanding the scope of enforcement beyond government authorities.
The lawsuit challenging SB 244 was filed today in the District Court of Douglas County on behalf of anonymous plaintiffs Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Kansas, and Ballard Spahr LLP. The complaint argues that SB 244 violates the Kansas Constitution’s protections for personal autonomy, privacy, equality under the law, due process, and freedom of speech.
Additionally, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a temporary restraining order on behalf of the anonymous plaintiffs, arguing that the order — followed by a temporary injunction — is necessary to prevent the “irreparable harm” that would result from SB 244.
State Rep. Abi Boatman, a Wichita Democrat and the only transgender member of the Kansas Legislature, told the Kansas City Star on Wednesday that “persecution is the point.”
“This legislation is a direct attack on the dignity and humanity of transgender Kansans,” said Monica Bennett, legal director of the ACLU of Kansas. “It undermines our state’s strong constitutional protections against government overreach and persecution.”
“SB 244 is a cruel and craven threat to public safety all in the name of fostering fear, division, and paranoia,” said Harper Seldin, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “The invalidation of state-issued IDs threatens to out transgender people against their will every time they apply for a job, rent an apartment, or interact with police. Taken as a whole, SB 244 is a transparent attempt to deny transgender people autonomy over their own identities and push them out of public life altogether.”
“SB 244 presents a state-sanctioned attack on transgender people aimed at silencing, dehumanizing, and alienating Kansans whose gender identity does not conform to the state legislature’s preferences,” said Heather St. Clair, a Ballard Spahr litigator working on the case. “Ballard Spahr is committed to standing with the ACLU and the plaintiffs in fighting on behalf of transgender Kansans for a remedy against the injustices presented by SB 244, and is dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights jeopardized by this new law.”
National
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Top editorial staff let go last week
Former staff members at the Advocate and Out magazines revealed that parent company Equalpride laid off a number of employees late last week.
Those let go included Advocate editor-in-chief Alex Cooper, Pride.com editor-in-chief Rachel Shatto, brand partnerships manager Erin Manley, community editor Marie-Adélina de la Ferriére, and Out magazine staff writers Moises Mendez and Bernardo Sim, according to a report in Hollywood Reporter.
Cooper, who joined the company in 2021, posted to social media that, “Few people have had the privilege of leading this legendary LGBTQ+ news outlet, and I’m deeply honored to have been one of them. To my team: thank you for the last four years. You’ve been the best. For those also affected today, please let me know how I can support you.”
The Advocate’s PR firm when reached by the Blade said it no longer represents the company. Emails to the Advocate went unanswered.
Equalpride on Friday announced it acquired “Them,” a digital LGBTQ outlet founded in 2017 by Conde Nast.
“Equalpride exists to elevate, celebrate and protect LGBTQ+ storytelling at scale,” Equalpride CEO Mark Berryhill said according to Hollywood Reporter. “By combining the strengths of our brands with this respected digital platform, we’re creating a unified ecosystem that delivers even more impact for our audiences, advertisers, and community partners.”
It’s not clear if “Them” staff would take over editorial responsibilities for the Advocate and Out.
