National
Sebelius violated federal law speaking at HRC event: report
White House maintains any infraction was minor and corrected

Secretary of Health & Human Services Kathleen Sebelius violated federal law when she spoke before an LGBT audience about the need to elect Democratic officials at a Human Rights Campaign event, according to a report made public Thursday by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.
The independent agency concluded Sebelius violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits civil servants from engaging in political activity, on Feb. 25 while speaking extemporaneously before an HRC campaign gala in Charlotte, N.C., although the Obama administration maintains any violation was corrected and the infraction was minor.
Sebelius used taxpayer funds to travel to an event in her official capacity, but reportedly veered from her prepared remarks and took a partisan tone, which was found to be in violation the Hatch Act. The report, dated Aug. 23, was delivered to President Obama.
According to the report, Sebelius’ calendar identified the event as official in nature. Online invitations referred to her in her official capacity as “Secretary Kathleen Sebelius” and “Secretary of DHHS Kathleen Sebelius.” A memo given to her suggested if she was asked about her personal views, she reply, “I’m here to represent the President and the Obama Administration, not in my personal capacity.”
During her speech, Sebelius talked as part of her prepared remarks about the Obama administration’s commitment to LGBT people — hitting on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, dropping defense of the Defense of Marriage Act in court and what the Affordable Care Act means for LGBT Americans. All of these remarks were consistent with the Hatch Act.
But Sebelius deviated from her prepared remarks, making news in the LGBT press when she called for the defeat of Amendment One in North Carolina — a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage that ultimately passed — about a month before the Obama campaign explicitly came out against the measure.
It’s these unscripted remarks that got Sebelius in trouble. She also advocated for the re-election of President Obama, saying “one of the imperatives is to make sure that we not only come together here in Charlotte to present the nomination to the president, but we make sure that in November he continues to be president for another four years.” She also called for the re-election of a Democratic governor in the state, saying, “it’s hugely important to make sure that we re-elect the president and elect a Democratic governor here in North Carolina.”
Following media inquiries about Sebelius’ speech, HHS issued a statement two days after the event saying the federal government wouldn’t pay for her trip and the department retroactively classified the event as political. HHS sought reimbursement from the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee for the costs of her travel. In testimony before OSC, Sebelius reportedly admitted her political remarks were a “mistake” and she “got a little caught up in the notion that the gains which had been made would clearly not continue without the president’s reelection.”
Still, OSC concluded Sebelius violated the law, stating, “These statements were made in Secretary Sebelius’ official capacity and therefore violated the Hatch Act’s prohibition against using official authority or influence to affect the results of an election.”
Responding to the report in a letter dated Sept. 7, Sebelius said OSC correctly notes that she acknowledged her political comments were a mistake, but said the agency should have concluded any violation of the Hatch Act was corrected. She also said she’s met with ethics attorneys for a greater understanding of what remarks are permissible in her official capacity.
“If there was a violation of the Hatch Act based on the use of my title, I believe the violation was technical and minor,” Sebelius said. “These are not the type of violations that the Hatch Act was intended to address.”
The investigation was initiated in March after a request by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chair of the House Government & Oversight Reform Committee.
In a statement, Issa said he appreciated OSC’s “timely and thorough” investigation and is awaiting further action from Obama.
“OSC’s report and findings underscore the importance of laws prohibiting mixing official government business with partisan political activity,” Issa said. “OSC has sent its findings to President Obama, who must now decide on appropriate action. The Committee awaits President Obama’s decision. As he decides the appropriate consequences for Secretary Sebelius, the president should consider the important leadership role of Cabinet Secretaries and the example they must set for the entire Executive Branch.”
Eric Schultz, a White House spokesperson, said the issue was corrected even before the OSC report came out and maintained the Obama administration holds officials to the highest level of integrity.
“This error was immediately acknowledged by the Secretary, promptly corrected, and no taxpayer dollars were misused,” Schultz said. “This administration holds itself to the highest ethical standards, which is why President Obama has installed the toughest ethics rules of any Administration in history — beginning on his first day in office when he signed an Executive Order instituting unprecedented reforms.”
Sebelius is no stranger to speaking to LGBT crowds to advocate for President Obama. In addition to speaking at the HRC event in Charlotte, Sebelius was at a D.C. fundraiser for LGBT people that both she and Obama attended. Sebelius also addressed members of the LGBT caucus last week at the Democratic National Convention.
The Human Rights Campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Sebelius’ apparent violation of federal campaign law at one of its events.
But Republican groups — including a gay conservative organization — took the report as an opportunity to criticize the Obama administration.
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of GOProud, took aim at the Obama administration over the revelations in the report. His organization has endorsed Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
“It shouldn’t take congressional action to know that a speech given to a partisan political organization, like HRC, is a political speech,” LaSalvia said. “All of us taxpayers owe Chairman Issa a debt of gratitude for his vigilance in exposing Hatch Act violations by this administration.”
The Republican National Committee accused the Obama administration more broadly of drawing on federal funds to pay for campaign expenses. Republicans have previously criticized President Obama for traveling on government funds to events that are ostensibly for official business, but are located in swing states in the presidential election.
“The Obama administration promised to change Washington but time and again we have seen questionable activity from the administration using taxpayer dollars,” RNC spokesperson Kirsten Kukowski said. “In fact, the questions about Secretary Sebelius pale in comparison to the White House’s blatant use of taxpayer dollars for campaign purposes.”
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.