National
Gay doctoral student files sexual harassment lawsuit against Columbia University
Alberto Leguina Ruzzi claims the school wrongly terminated him
Alberto Leguina Ruzzi (Photo courtesy of Alberto Leguina Ruzzi)
A gay Chilean doctoral student claims in a lawsuit against Columbia University that he was unfairly fired from his job after complaining that a supervisor sexually harassed him.
Alberto Leguina Ruzzi, 25, alleges that Dr. Qais Al-Awqati, a professor at Columbia’s College of Physicians and Surgeons sent him a picture of himself from Grindr on March 9, eight days after he began working at Columbia University Medical Center in Manhattan. He claims that Al-Awqati asked him whether “he would date an older man.” Leguina said that he rejected his advances.
“I have many guys as beautiful and as young as you,” responded Al-Awqati to Leguina, according to the lawsuit his lawyer filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on July 27. “So it is not a joke. You need to have better manners when in New York. Maybe in Argentina or Chile, you are a spoiled Mamma’s boy.”
“It was an awkward situation because it was my first week,” Leguina, a PhD candidate in biology at Chile’s Catholic University, told the Blade from New York City. He said that he specifically asked to work directly with Al-Awqati when he applied for a grant to come to Columbia. “I never thought someone I admired like Al-Awqati would do this.”
Immediately after he said he declined the proposition, Leguina said that Al-Awqati came out of his office and screamed “You are out!” He said he suffered what he described as a panic attack and began to cry because he thought he had been fired. The lawsuit claims that Leguina’s other direct supervisor, Rosemary Sampogna, witnessed the incident and assured him that she would work to ensure that he kept his job. Leguina further claims that she said she would report the incident to the hospital’s Department of Human Resources.
The lawsuit states that Leguina discussed it with Mayra Marte-Miraz, director of operations for Columbia’s Department of Medicine, on March 15. Leguina claims that she told him that he “needed to continue working as if nothing happened.” He further alleges Marte-Miraz told him four days later that he needed to “deal with this matter as a big man” and he “must pretend that nothing happened.”
Marte-Miraz allegedly told Leguina that he would have not declined Al-Awqati’s advances if he was “young and pretty.” The lawsuit states that she further threatened to send him back to Chile if he discussed the incident with an attorney, his Chilean supervisors or any other officials in the South American country.
Leguina claims that Al-Awqati subsequently apologized and gave him a Mac Book computer. The lawsuit further alleges that he told him to “pretend that nothing happened.” Leguina said he told Marte-Miraz that Al-Awqati had apologized to him and he said she assured him that she would perform what she described as a full investigation into the alleged incident.
Following that meeting; Leguina said that Sampogna, whom he said had previously praised his work, began to call him “useless.” The lawsuit notes that she told him he was “incapable of troubleshooting” and “incapable of doing his job.” And it further alleges that Sampogna kicked furniture, used profanity and abruptly dropped his research material when Leguina asked her for help.
Leguina further alleges that both she and Al-Awqati made his job “virtually impossible.”
Marte-Miraz accused Leguina during a May 10 meeting of posting derogatory messages about Sampogna on his Facebook page, according to the lawsuit. Leguina said he provided her with a copy of his Facebook transcript that he claims disputed her allegations.
“Your mind is clouded and your stress is simply because you are from a small country and this is New York and you just need to learn,” responded Marte-Miraz, according to the lawsuit.
Leguina said Marte-Miraz suggested that he meet with Sampogna to discuss ways that he could improve his work — she was unavailable, so he said he was forced to meet with Al-Awqati himself. The lawsuit claims that he told Leguina that, among other things, he had a poor work ethic and had been absent. It notes that Al-Awqati had private weekly meetings with Leguina, during which he was required to show his work and provide a report. The lawsuit further claims that Al-Awqati “awkwardly expressed how impressed he was” with Leguina’s “skills and intelligence” during these meetings.
Leguina alleges that he was forced to take prescription medications to help him cope with the stress, anxiety and insomnia he said he was experiencing. He said also e-mailed one of his Chilean supervisors to discuss the situation with him.
Al-Awqati allegedly sent her a “derogatory e-mail” that criticized his performance. In spite of these claims, Leguina received an award and positive comments about his Columbia work during the American Society of Hypertension’s annual meeting.
Leguina said his Chilean supervisors told him on June 8 that he had to step down and return to Chile based on Al-Awqati’s feedback. The lawsuit claims that Al-Awqati initially questioned the decision in follow-up e-mail to Leguina, but again criticized his work in a follow-up meeting. It further alleges that Al-Awqati “suddenly got very nervous” when Leguina raised his sexual advances and subsequent retaliation with him.
“It has nothing to do with that, but if you need to return to Chile, then just go,” said Al-Awqati, according to the lawsuit.
Leguina was fired on June 12.
“Maybe I was ready to deal with rats in my apartment or New York stuff, but not sexual harassment,” Leguina told the Blade. “I knew I couldn’t just let this go. I couldn’t just leave.”
Columbia has yet to formally respond to the lawsuit, and declined to comment on the allegations. Leguina, who seeks unspecified monetary damages, said he hopes his decision to come forward sends a message to those who suffer sexual harassment in the workplace.
“It’s about some kind of awareness,” he said. “You cannot let these [things] happen anymore. I know I’m not the first person, but I hope I can be the last person.”
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
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.
National
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources
Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.
“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.
“These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.
It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”
The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question.
A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit.
While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.
Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.
“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.
“Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says.
Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”
Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”
Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.
“As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from the Washington Blade.
“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said.
The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”
It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”
The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society.
The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.
While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”
“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.
The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.
Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.
Adams Morgan queer bar broken into and vandalized
‘Things Like This’ embraces formula and plus-size visibility
Calendar: May 23-29
Comings & Goings
New doc chronicles gay hero’s journey from rape to forgiveness
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
WorldPride events round-up
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
