Connect with us

National

HRC pledges $1 million for same-sex marriage efforts

Campaigns in Maryland, Washington, Minnesota and Maine each received $250,000.

Published

on

HRC President Chad Griffin (Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Human Rights Campaign on Monday announced it has given an additional $1 million to support same-sex marriage efforts in four states.

Campaigns in Maryland, Washington, Minnesota and Maine each received $250,000 to either defend their state’s same-sex marriage laws, defeat a proposed constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman or allow nuptials for gays and lesbians. HRC has so far contributed $4.8 million to marriage-related efforts in this election cycle. This figure includes $853,000 to the legislative campaign to secure passage of Maryland’s same-sex marriage law earlier this year and $728,000 in cash and in-kind donations to Marylanders for Marriage Equality, the group defending the statute ahead of the November referendum on it.

“This is a tipping point year in the fight for marriage equality that requires significant investment,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “We are committed to making sure this is the year that our opponents can no longer claim Americans will not support marriage equality at the ballot box.”

Recipients were quick to welcome the additional HRC funds.

“It’s a fantastic investment that they’re making in our work here,” Josh Levin, campaign director of Marylanders for Marriage Equality, told the Blade. “They’ve been a tremendous partner throughout the legislative fight and this has shown they are dedicated to winning here and confident that we have the resources to be successful.”

“It’s great to have their support,” added Matt McTighe, campaign manager of Mainers United for Marriage, which seeks marriage rights for gays and lesbians in the Pine Tree State.  “We’re thrilled to have it and it’s just a great validation of the work that we’re doing in Maine.”

Zach Silk, campaign manager of Washington United for Marriage, the group defending the Evergreen State’s same-sex marriage law, echoed McTighe and Levin.

“We are incredibly grateful for HRC’s contribution to the campaign,” he told the Blade. “They’ve played a sustained and continued role in our campaign since before the legislative battle. They’ve been on the ground here in Washington State since last fall, and [has] really stood shoulder-to-shoulder with us fighting the key moments of the campaign.”

 

Groups plan to use HRC money to fund ad buys, voter outreach

Levin declined to comment on either the amount of money his group has raised or the amount of money HRC has given to the campaign, but McTighe told the Blade that Mainers United for Marriage has raised slightly under $2 million. Washington United for Marriage said in a press release earlier this month that its budget is more than $5.4 million — including the $2.5 million that Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and his wife MacKenzie donated last month.

Minnesotans United for All Families, which opposes the proposed state constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman, has raised slightly more than $5.7 million as of July 23. Campaign spokesperson Kate Brickman told the Blade that 80 percent of this money has come from inside the state, while 91 percent of the 25,000 individual campaign donors are Minnesotans.

Brickman added the HRC funds will help the campaign respond to what she expects will be a flood of pro-amendment ads in the weeks leading up to the November vote.

“For us it’s a matter of us to be able to combat that late in the game and respond to the hurtful [and negative ads,]” she said.

McTighe also discussed how his campaign plans to use some of the HRC money it received.

“Media buys are a huge part of it because that’s something that’s really competitive in a presidential election year — there’s a lot of competition to buy up time from our opponents, from the other campaigns,” he said. “One thing we’ve been doing over the last two years in Maine is really trying to have as many one-on-one conversations as possible through our field and canvass operations. We’re going to continue to fund that work and try to do paid media as well.”

Like in Maine and Minnesota, Silk said the additional funds will go towards what he described as an “aggressive advertising campaign” in Washington ahead of the referendum.

“This will be an important part of it,” he said.

A CNN/ORC International poll in June that 54 percent of Americans support marriage rights for same-sex couples.

A survey that Hart Research Associates conducted late last month found that 54 percent of Maryland voters would vote for the state’s same-sex marriage law in November. A Public Policy Polling poll in June noted 51 percent of Washington voters back their state’s same-sex marriage law. A Critical Insights survey last month indicates that 57 percent of Maine voters support extending marriage rights to gays and lesbians.

A PPP survey in June found that only 43 percent of Minnesotans support their state’s proposed constitutional amendment to ban nuptials for same-sex couples, compared to 49 percent of voters who oppose it.

HRC spokesperson Fred Sainz conceded to the Blade that the presidential election, high-profile congressional races and other ballot initiatives are among the hurdles that same-sex marriage supporters will face in the coming weeks and months. He stressed, however, that momentum remains on their side.

“The good news for us, which is really, really, really good news, is the atmospherics are positive ones,” said Sainz. “The public opinion polls are continuing to head in the right directions — all the public opinion polls in these four states are headed in the right direction, the president’s support for marriage equality is good. Every single federal court that has expressed an opinion on this issue has expressed it in our favor, so the atmospherics are definitely very positive and are all trending in the right direction.”

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Federal Courts

Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups

Lambda Legal filed the lawsuit in federal court

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A federal judge on Monday blocked the enforcement of three of President Donald Trump’s executive orders that would have threatened to defund nonprofit organizations providing health care and services for LGBTQ people and those living with HIV.

The preliminary injunction was awarded by Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in a case, San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, filed by Lambda Legal and eight other organizations.

Implementation of the executive orders — two aimed at diversity, equity, and inclusion along with one targeting the transgender community — will be halted pending the outcome of the litigation challenging them.

“This is a critical win — not only for the nine organizations we represent, but for LGBTQ communities and people living with HIV across the country,” said Jose Abrigo, Lambda Legal’s HIV Project director and senior counsel on the case. 

“The court blocked anti-equity and anti-LGBTQ executive orders that seek to erase transgender people from public life, dismantle DEI efforts, and silence nonprofits delivering life-saving services,” Abrigo said. “Today’s ruling acknowledges the immense harm these policies inflict on these organizations and the people they serve and stops Trump’s orders in their tracks.”

Tigar wrote, in his 52-page decision, “While the Executive requires some degree of freedom to implement its political agenda, it is still bound by the constitution.”

“And even in the context of federal subsidies, it cannot weaponize Congressionally appropriated funds to single out protected communities for disfavored treatment or suppress ideas that it does not like or has deemed dangerous,” he said.

Without the preliminary injunction, the judge wrote, “Plaintiffs face the imminent loss of federal funding critical to their ability to provide lifesaving healthcare and support services to marginalized LGBTQ populations,” a loss that “not only threatens the survival of critical programs but also forces plaintiffs to choose between their constitutional rights and their continued existence.”

The organizations in the lawsuit are located in California (San Francisco AIDS Foundation, Los Angeles LGBT Center, GLBT Historical Society, and San Francisco Community Health Center), Arizona (Prisma Community Care), New York (The NYC LGBT Community Center), Pennsylvania (Bradbury-Sullivan Community Center), Maryland (Baltimore Safe Haven), and Wisconsin (FORGE).

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Activists rally for Andry Hernández Romero in front of Supreme Court

Gay asylum seeker ‘forcibly deported’ to El Salvador, described as political prisoner

Published

on

Immigrant Defenders Law Center President Lindsay Toczylowski, on right, speaks in support of her client, Andry Hernández Romero, in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 6, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

More than 200 people gathered in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday and demanded the Trump-Vance administration return to the U.S. a gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who it “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador.

Lindsay Toczylowski, president of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a Los Angeles-based organization that represents Andry Hernández Romero, is among those who spoke alongside U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Human Rights Campaign Campaigns and Communications Vice President Jonathan Lovitz. Sarah Longwell of the Bulwark, Pod Save America’s Jon Lovett, and Tim Miller are among those who also participated in the rally.

“Andry is a son, a brother. He’s an actor, a makeup artist,” said Toczylowski. “He is a gay man who fled Venezuela because it was not safe for him to live there as his authentic self.”

(Video by Michael K. Lavers)

The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”

President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The Trump-Vance administration subsequently “forcibly removed” Hernández and hundreds of other Venezuelans to El Salvador.

Toczylowski said she believes Hernández remains at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT. Toczylowski also disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.

“Andry fled persecution in Venezuela and came to the U.S. to seek protection. He has no criminal history. He is not a member of the Tren de Aragua gang. Yet because of his crown tattoos, we believe at this moment that he sits in a torture prison, a gulag, in El Salvador,” said Toczylowski. “I say we believe because we have not had any proof of life for him since the day he was put on a U.S. government-funded plane and forcibly disappeared to El Salvador.”

“Andry is not alone,” she added.

Takano noted the federal government sent his parents, grandparents, and other Japanese Americans to internment camps during World War II under the Alien Enemies Act. The gay California Democrat also described Hernández as “a political prisoner, denied basic rights under a law that should have stayed in the past.”

“He is not a case number,” said Takano. “He is a person.”

Hernández had been pursuing his asylum case while at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego.

A hearing had been scheduled to take place on May 30, but an immigration judge the day before dismissed his case. Immigrant Defenders Law Center has said it will appeal the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which the Justice Department oversees.

“We will not stop fighting for Andry, and I know neither will you,” said Toczylowski.

Friday’s rally took place hours after Attorney General Pam Bondi said Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who the Trump-Vance administration wrongfully deported to El Salvador, had returned to the U.S. Abrego will face federal human trafficking charges in Tennessee.

Continue Reading

National

A husband’s story: Michael Carroll reflects on life with Edmund White

Iconic author died this week; ‘no sunnier human in the world’

Published

on

Michael Carroll spoke to the Blade after the death his husband Edmund White this week. (Photo by Michael Carroll)

Unlike most gay men of my generation, I’ve only been to Fire Island twice. Even so, the memory of my first visit has never left me. The scenery was lovely, and the boys were sublime — but what stood out wasn’t the beach or the parties. It was a quiet afternoon spent sipping gin and tonics in a mid-century modern cottage tucked away from the sand and sun.

Despite Fire Island’s reputation for hedonism, our meeting was more accident than escapade. Michael Carroll — a Facebook friend I’d chatted with but never met — mentioned that he and his husband, Ed, would be there that weekend, too. We agreed to meet for a drink. On a whim, I checked his profile and froze. Ed was author Edmund White.

I packed a signed copy of Carroll’s “Little Reef” and a dog-eared hardback of “A Boy’s Own Story,” its spine nearly broken from rereads. I was excited to meet both men and talk about writing, even briefly.

Yesterday, I woke to the news that Ed had passed away. Ironically, my first thought was of Michael.

This week, tributes to Edmund White are everywhere — rightly celebrating his towering legacy as a novelist, essayist, and cultural icon. I’ve read all of his books, and I could never do justice to the scope of a career that defined and chronicled queer life for more than half a century. I’ll leave that to better-prepared journalists.

But in those many memorials, I’ve noticed something missing. When Michael Carroll is mentioned, it’s usually just a passing reference: “White’s partner of thirty years, twenty-five years his junior.” And yet, in the brief time I spent with this couple on Fire Island, it was clear to me that Michael was more than a footnote — he was Ed’s anchor, editor, companion, and champion. He was the one who knew his husband best.

They met in 1995 after Michael wrote Ed a fan letter to tell him he was coming to Paris. “He’d lost the great love of his life a year before,” Michael told me. “In one way, I filled a space. Understand, I worshiped this man and still do.”

When I asked whether there was a version of Ed only he knew, Michael answered without hesitation: “No sunnier human in the world, obvious to us and to people who’ve only just or never met him. No dark side. Psychology had helped erase that, I think, or buffed it smooth.”

Despite the age difference and divergent career arcs, their relationship was intellectually and emotionally symbiotic. “He made me want to be elegant and brainy; I didn’t quite reach that, so it led me to a slightly pastel minimalism,” Michael said. “He made me question my received ideas. He set me free to have sex with whoever I wanted. He vouchsafed my moods when they didn’t wobble off axis. Ultimately, I encouraged him to write more minimalistically, keep up the emotional complexity, and sleep with anyone he wanted to — partly because I wanted to do that too.”

Fully open, it was a committed relationship that defied conventional categories. Ed once described it as “probably like an 18th-century marriage in France.” Michael elaborated: “It means marriage with strong emotion — or at least a tolerance for one another — but no sex; sex with others. I think.”

That freedom, though, was always anchored in deep devotion and care — and a mutual understanding that went far beyond art, philosophy, or sex. “He believed in freedom and desire,” Michael said, “and the two’s relationship.”

When I asked what all the essays and articles hadn’t yet captured, Michael paused. “Maybe that his writing was tightly knotted, but that his true personality was vulnerable, and that he had the defense mechanisms of cheer and optimism to conceal that vulnerability. But it was in his eyes.”

The moment that captured who Ed was to him came at the end. “When he was dying, his second-to-last sentence (garbled then repeated) was, ‘Don’t forget to pay Merci,’ the cleaning lady coming the next day. We had had a rough day, and I was popping off like a coach or dad about getting angry at his weakness and pushing through it. He took it almost like a pack mule.” 

Edmund White’s work shaped generations — it gave us language for desire, shame, wit, and liberation. But what lingers just as powerfully is the extraordinary life Ed lived with a man who saw him not only as a literary giant but as a real person: sunny, complex, vulnerable, generous.

In the end, Ed’s final words to his husband weren’t about his books or his legacy. They were about care, decency, and love. “You’re good,” he told Michael—a benediction, a farewell, maybe even a thank-you.

And now, as the world celebrates the prolific writer and cultural icon Edmund White, it feels just as important to remember the man and the person who knew him best. Not just the story but the characters who stayed to see it through to the end.

Continue Reading

Popular