Connect with us

Local

Polyak discusses marriage referendum, future activism

Former Equality Maryland board chair spoke to the Blade less than a month after she stepped down

Published

on

Lisa Polyak, gay news, Washington Blade
Lisa Polyak, gay news, Washington Blade

Polyak was lead plaintiff in the Maryland marriage equality lawsuit (Deane and Polyak v. Conaway). (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The former chair of Equality Maryland’s Board of Directors stressed on Monday she remains optimistic that voters will uphold the state’s same-sex marriage law in November.

“The polling trend is definitely way more positive than it has been in the last couple of years, but we continue to see evidence of people feeling strongly in another way,” said Lisa Polyak, referring to the controversy over Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy’s comments against marriage rights for gays and lesbians. She also described Josh Levin of Marylanders for Marriage Equality as a “very effective campaign manager” who has begun to receive the resources she said he needs to defend the same-sex marriage law at the ballot. Polyak added she feels that both President Obama’s support of nuptials for gays and lesbians and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s resolution in support of the issue provided the campaign with additional momentum.

“If we win in November, it will be in large measure because of those two events,” she said. “The campaign, rightly, is coming in under that and doing their job efficiently and well.”

Polyak and her partner of more than 30 years, Gita Deane, have remained two of the most prominent figures in the fight for nuptials for gays and lesbians in Maryland since they became the lead plaintiffs in the same-sex marriage lawsuit that Equality Maryland and the American Civil Liberties Union filed in 2004. The Maryland Court of Appeals in 2007 ultimately upheld the constitutionality of the state’s ban on nuptials for gays and lesbians, but Polyak stressed to the Blade that she and Deane simply wanted to protect their children.

“The reason we got involved in the first place was because we’ve had all of these sorts of unexpected experiences trying to take care of our kids,” she said, pointing to obtaining health care and passports for the couple’s two daughters and entering the country with them were among the difficulties they faced. “Starry eyed, we thought well we’ll get involved with the marriage litigation because you know if we were married we wouldn’t have these problems, although of course we had no idea what was ahead.”

Polyak said that the children of she and her wife Deane, Maya, who is 16, and Devi, who is 13, “were fairly renascent” about their decision to challenge Maryland’s same-sex marriage ban.

“For the older one, we told her that we were going to be in the litigation and we told her why in terms that we thought were appropriate for her… [what] it boiled down to is that we wanted to be married and that we couldn’t be married right now because of the way that the law was and just that she was shocked. And she told us so,” she recalled. “She goes; what do you mean you’re not married? I thought you were my parents and why aren’t you married? So it began sort of not just being the public face, but also like having this conversation in an ongoing way with our kids every year of their growth about what they could understand.”

Court of Appeals decision was “awful”

“Ultimately, for me especially it was important for them to see that even when things don’t go the way you want the first time, you don’t give up,” said Polyak as she stressed the need for her and Deane to “hold ourselves together for our girls so that they didn’t think bad things were going to happen to them or to our family.”

More than four years after Maryland’s highest court ruled against them in Deane and Polyak v. Conway, state lawmakers approved a same-sex marriage bill. Governor Martin O’Malley signed it into law in March. “Of course happiness,” said Polyak when asked about her reaction. “More than that just relief at not having to visit it again next year, hopefully, with the referendum not withstanding because I think everybody who has worked on this, truthfully, is exhausted.”

The looming likelihood of a referendum on the same-sex marriage law once the governor signed it factored heavily into their decision to marry in D.C. last year. Attorney General Douglas Gansler said in Feb. 2010 that the state could recognize same-sex marriages that were legally performed in other jurisdictions. O’Malley subsequently ordered state agencies to recognize such unions.

“My partner Gita felt very strongly about us getting older, about our kids getting older and you know what would happen if we could’ve got married and we didn’t get married, what might that bring if something happened to one of us, and that has to do with our family situation basically,” said Polyak. “Again, looking again through the eyes of our girls, they knew that marriage was available in D.C. and of course Gita and I wanted to be married. For them it didn’t make sense about why weren’t we getting married, so we were very aware of our personal needs and then also the fact that we didn’t want people in Maryland to think that we were giving up. We weren’t telegraphing of course any kind of negativity about the ongoing legislation. We literally went down to D.C. on the down low and we got married with a very small group of people — like eight people who were close to us.”

Polyak spoke to the Blade less than a month after she stepped down.

She was appointed acting chair of Equality Maryland’s Board of Directors in June 2011 after attorney Chuck Butler resigned in the wake of former executive director Morgan Meneses-Sheets’ April 2011 departure from the organization. The board voted to appoint Polyak chair during Equality Maryland’s annual meeting in January.

“I don’t know about lessons learned, but I know for Patrick Wojahn, who was the other board chair, and myself, both he and I were plaintiffs in the marriage litigation, and then just through serendipity found ourselves as the board chairs of the respective boards at the time when Equality Maryland went through all those difficulties,” she said. “I think somehow for both of us we weren’t going to let it to fall apart. What Equality Maryland aspires to, which is the legal and the policy health of LGBT citizens I think is something both Patrick and I feel strongly in. And without really having a road map about how we were going to sort of keep things from falling completely apart, we just decided that we weren’t going to let it happen and we had three of the residual board members who worked with us all last summer. In retrospect I can’t believe that we did it, but i think it’s just like anything — if you really believe in something, you find a way.”

In spite of her departure from Equality Maryland, Polyak said she plans to continue to advocate on behalf of LGBT families and children. She remains the online moderator of Families with Pride, a group for LGBT parents in Baltimore. And it plans to hold a reunion in the coming weeks.

“Both my girls are getting ready to think about college. And so that’s always time consuming and lots of planning and I want to share in that time with them,” said Polyak. “I have to say both for Gita and for myself, our focus has always been about what is the lack of law, what the lack of protections do to children and so I’m fairly certain that ending Equality Maryland won’t be the end of my sort of advocacy for equality for our community.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case

Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge

Published

on

Sean Charles Dunn was found not guilty on Thursday. (Washington Blade file photo by Joe Reberkenny)

A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10. 

Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets. 

Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers  standing in front of the shop.

 Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.

 “I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.

 “And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”

The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.

Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured. 

Prosecutors  with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.

“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”

The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1. 

Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom. 

Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various  provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.

The dispute over the intricacies of  the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.

Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called  “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.

DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.

“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.

Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.

Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident. 

“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it  was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.” 

“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.

“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.

Continue Reading

Maryland

Democrats hold leads in almost every race of Annapolis municipal election

Jared Littmann ahead in mayor’s race.

Published

on

Preliminary election results from Tuesday show Democrats likely will remain in control of Annapolis City Hall. Jared Littmann thanks his wife, Marlene Niefeld, as he addresses supporters after polls closed Tuesday night. (Photo by Rick Hutzell for the Baltimore Banner)

By CODY BOTELER | The Democratic candidates in the Annapolis election held early leads in the races for mayor and nearly every city council seat, according to unofficial results released on election night.

Jared Littmann, a former alderman and the owner of K&B Ace Hardware, did not go so far as to declare victory in his race to be the next mayor of Annapolis, but said he’s optimistic that the mail-in ballots to be counted later this week will support his lead.

Littmannn said November and December will “fly by” as he plans to meet with the city department heads and chiefs to “pepper them with questions.”

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.

Continue Reading

Virginia

Democrats increase majority in Va. House of Delegates

Tuesday was Election Day in state.

Published

on

Virginia Capitol (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Democrats on Tuesday increased their majority in the Virginia House of Delegates.

The Associated Press notes the party now has 61 seats in the chamber. Democrats before Election Day had a 51-48 majority in the House.

All six openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual candidates — state Dels. Rozia Henson (D-Prince William County), Laura Jane Cohen (D-Fairfax County), Joshua Cole (D-Fredericksburg), Marcia Price (D-Newport News), Adele McClure (D-Arlington County), and Mark Sickles (D-Fairfax County) — won re-election.

Lindsey Dougherty, a bisexual Democrat, defeated state Del. Carrie Coyner (R-Chesterfield County) in House District 75 that includes portions of Chesterfield and Prince George Counties. (Attorney General-elect Jay Jones in 2022 texted Coyner about a scenario in which he shot former House Speaker Todd Gilbert, a Republican.)

Other notable election results include Democrat John McAuliff defeating state Del. Geary Higgins (R-Loudoun County) in House District 30. Former state Del. Elizabeth Guzmán beat state Del. Ian Lovejoy (R-Prince William County) in House District 22.

Democrats increased their majority in the House on the same night they won all three statewide offices: governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general.

Narissa Rahaman is the executive director of Equality Virginia Advocates, the advocacy branch of Equality Virginia, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy group, last week noted the election results will determine the future of LGBTQ rights, reproductive freedom, and voting rights in the state.

Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin in 2024 signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.

The General Assembly earlier this year approved a resolution that seeks to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment that defines marriage in the state constitution as between a man and a woman. The resolution must pass in two successive legislatures before it can go to the ballot.

Shreya Jyotishi contributed to this article.

Continue Reading

Popular