News
Supreme Court refuses NOM’s challenge to Maine donor laws
Anti-gay group launches website for donors to declare contributions
The U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday it won’t hear a case challenging NOM’s disclosure laws (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
The U.S. Supreme Court has denied another request from an anti-gay group challenging financial disclosure laws in Maine that require the organization to reveal who donated to the 2009 marriage ballot initiative campaign.
Justices announced on Monday they wouldn’t hear the case, filed by the National Organization for Marriage, on an order listing hundreds of lawsuits they have declined to hear over the course of the 2013 term.
The court’s decision not to hear the case, known as National Organization for Marriage v. McKee, was made during the September 24 conference, the first meeting of justices for this term, but wasn’t announced until Monday. Last week, the court announced six cases it had decided to consider during the conference.
NOM had filed the lawsuit against state disclosure laws in Maine after the organization in 2009 helped the anti-gay side in a referendum over recently the signed same-sex marriage law, which state voters ultimately rejected by 53 percent.
Among other things, NOM argued the same donor disclosure laws shouldn’t be applied to both political candidates and ballot questions and asserted the $100 reporting threshold in Maine is so low it doesn’t constitutionally further the state’s information interest. But the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals in January affirmed a district court ruling upholding the disclosure laws, which NOM later appealed to the Supreme Court.
Fred Sainz, vice president of communications at the Human Rights Campaign, took the opportunity of the decision to knock the anti-gay group.
“NOM has shown an unwillingness to play by the rules and this is yet another legal set-back,” Sainz added. “This is proof that their penchant for secrecy has run them afoul of the law.”
NOM won’t be required to reveal its donors immediately, but the decision means Maine can continue to pursue its investigation of the organization’s activities related to the 2009 ballot measure.
Phyllis Gardiner, a Maine assistant attorney general and counsel to the state’s Commission on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices, said the state is “pleased” the First Circuit’s ruling will be upheld, but acknowledged the investigation continues.
“The Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices has an ongoing investigation, and there’s pending state court litigation as well that has not yet been fully resolved,” Gardiner said. “So, the constitutionality of the statute was upheld by the First Circuit, and now it’s a matter of the commission completing its work and making its determination.”
Gardiner added she doesn’t know the exact timing for when the ethics commission will finish its investigation.
But NOM wasn’t happy with the decision. John Eastman, NOM’s chair, said in a statement his organization is “disappointed” with the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case, but “will be reviewing” the state’s requests, which the organization says is different now than in 2009.
“In their briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court, the state appeared to have substantially narrowed the type of information they were requesting from NOM,” Eastman said. “Had the state taken the position they took recently back in 2009, this litigation might well have been avoided. We will be reviewing the requests for information that the state has made in light if the narrow interpretation the State has now provided to its own statute.”
Darrin Hurwitz, HRC’s assistant general counsel, responded to NOM’s statement by saying the organization should have complied with Maine laws like other organizations did in the first place.
“This litigation could have been avoided in 2009 if NOM had chosen to abide by the law then and disclose donors to their Maine efforts as every other organization that participated in Question 1 did,” Hurwitz said. “It’s easy to say that you’ll respond to the state’s requests after you’ve lost a 3-year court battle and have no other options.”
Gardiner also took issue with the idea that Maine changed what it wanted from NOM since 2009.
“I think that may be based on a misunderstanding,” Gardiner said. “The commission’s interpretation of Maine’s statute — what it requires — has not narrowed or changed during the course of this litigation.”
On the same day as the court announced it wouldn’t hear the lawsuit, Brian Brown, NOM’s president, announced a new website, KeeptheRepublicandMarriage.com, on which donors can publicly declare they’ve contributed money to the organization.
“Even though donors to NOM are not subject to public disclosure, a number of our donors wanted to show that they would not be bullied and were not afraid to publicly proclaim their support for NOM as a way of encouraging others to publicly stand up to support marriage,” Brown said in a statement. “These key donors were inspired by the courage of Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick Fil A, who resolutely told Americans that he unabashedly believed in God’s design for marriage as the union of one man and one woman.”
The website already has 26 people listed, but no information other than an individual’s name is given. The top name listed is Sean Fieler, who presumably is the same Sean Fieler who’s chair of the American Principles Project, a conservative group that opposes same-sex marriage and abortion rights. That group didn’t immediately respond to a request to comment.
Under the headings of the announcement that it won’t take the NOM case, the order from the court states, “The motion of respondents for leave to file a brief in opposition under seal with redacted copies for the public record is granted.”
Hurwitz said this note is procedural and pertains to the respondent brief filed by Maine’s attorney general in the case. The document has lines relating to NOM’s fundraising that are redacted and the court is granting the state’s request to keep them sealed.
It’s not the first time the Supreme Court has declined to hear one of NOM’s challenges to Maine’s financial disclosure laws. In February, the Supreme Court announced it wouldn’t hear a different challenge to Maine’s laws also called National Organization for Marriage v. McKee. But, unlike the later lawsuit, the NOM’s argument in the earlier case was political action committee requirements in state were unconstitutionally broad and vague.
The news on the NOM case comes as many anticipate a decision from the court on whether it take up pending challenges to California’s Proposition 8, known as Hollingsworth v. Perry, and one of the cases against the Defense of Marriage Act, Windsor v. United States. Both were docketed for the September 24, but the order on Monday reveals that no announcements have been made on those high-profile cases.
The Supreme Court has also yet to make a decision on whether it’ll hear the case of Diaz v. Brewer. The request was filed by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R), who was appealing an injunction placed by a district court prohibiting her from enforcing a law taking away domestic partner benefits from Arizona state employees.
NOTE: This article has been updated from its initial version to include NOM’s response to the decision as well as comments from Phyllis Gardiner.
Virginia
Prominent activists join ‘Living History’ panel at Freddie’s Beach Bar
Event organized by owner of new Friends of Dorothy Café in Alexandria
Six prominent LGBTQ community leaders and elders, including a beloved drag performer, talked about their role in advancing the rights of LGBTQ people and their thoughts on how the upcoming generation of LGBTQ youth should get ready to join the movement participated in an April 23 “Living History” panel discussion at Freddie’s Beach Bar.
The event was organized by Dorothy Edwards, who plans to open Friends of Dorothy Café in Alexandria. She said the café will be an LGBTQ community “intergenerational space” that will host events like the one she organized at Freddie’s Beach Bar.
“It will be a space for connection, storytelling, and belonging, especially for LGBTQ+ youth and community members who don’t always have places like that,” she said in a statement announcing the event at Freddie’s.
The six panelists at the Freddie’s event included Kierra Johnson, president of the D.C.-based National LGBTQ Task Force; Freddie Lutz, owner of Freddie’s Beach Bar located in the Crystal City section of Arlington, Va.; Donnell Robinson, who for many years performed in drag as the icon Ella Fitzgerald; Taylor Chandler Walker, a local transgender rights advocate, author and public speaker; Heidi Ellis, coordinator of the D.C. LGBTQ Budget Coalition; and Leti Gomez, an LGBTQ Latino community advocate and chair of the board of the American LGBTQ+ Museum.
Dr. Ashley Elliott, an LGBTQ community advocate and clinician who also goes by the name Dr. Vivid, served as moderator of the panel discussion, asking each of the panelists a serious of questions before opening the event to questions from the audience.
Among the issues discussed by the panelists was who was “centered” and who was excluded in the earlier years of LGBTQ organizing. Elliot also asked the panelists to address topics such as racism within queer spaces, gender dynamics, and strategies for coalition building between the LGBTQ community and other movements, including civil rights, feminism, and immigrant rights.
Each of the panelists expressed various thoughts on how the LGBTQ rights movement can make changes in response to the questions: “What can we do better?” and “Who is being left out?”
“I’m overwhelmed and so thankful that everyone on this panel said yes and agreed to come,” Edwards told the Washington Blade at the conclusion of the event. “I think every one of those people, including the moderator, was so brilliant and has done such good work for this community,” she said.
Edwards noted that each of the panelists, who have been involved in LGBTQ advocacy work for many years, talked about how they interact with younger LGBTQ people who are just beginning to become involved in activism.
“Truly, it’s an intergenerational conversation, and their wisdom and their words and their experiences can be disseminated to younger generations and people who want to do this work, people who want to fight for our community,” Edwards said.
“I was pleasantly surprised,” Lutz said. “I thought it was a good turnout, and everybody was very enthusiastic and engaged,” he said. “And I think it was great and fabulous.”
Lutz has operated Freddie’s Beach Bar for more than 25 years and has hosted numerous LGBTQ events. A sign above the front entrance door to the popular LGBTQ bar and restaurant says, “Straight Friendly Gay Bar.”
Edwards said the April 23 event was recorded and she will make arrangements for the recording to be released for others to view it. The Blade will post the link in this story when it becomes available.
District of Columbia
Second trans member announces plans to resign from Capital Pride board
Zion Peters cites ‘lack of interest in the Black trans community’
Zion Peters, a member of the Capital Pride Alliance Board of Directors who identifies as transgender, told the Washington Blade he plans to resign from the board “due to the lack of interest in the trans community, specifically the Black trans community.”
Peters continued, “Nobody has checked on me in the last two months so that shows their level of unprofessionalism towards their board members and the community as a whole.”
If he resigns, Peters would be the second known trans person to resign from the Capital Pride board since February, when longtime trans activist Taylor Lianne Chandler informed the board of her resignation in a detailed letter that was sent to the Blade by an anonymous source.
Chandler, who served as chair of the Capital Pride Transgender, Gender Non-Conforming, and Intersex Committee, stated in her Feb. 24 letter that she resigned from the board out of frustration that the board had failed to address instances of “sexual misconduct” within the Capital Pride organization. The organization’s and the board’s transgender-related policies were not cited in her letter as a reason for her resignation.
The Blade learned of Peters’s plans to resign from an anonymous source who thought Peters had already resigned along with four other board members identified by the anonymous source. The others, who Capital Pride confirmed this week had resigned, include Anthony Musa, Bob Gilchrist, Kaniya Walker, and Dai Nguyen.
Musa and Gilchrist told the Blade they resigned for personal reasons related to their jobs and that they fully support Capital Pride’s work as an organization that coordinates the city’s annual LGBTQ Pride events.
The Blade has been unable to reach Walker and Nguyen to determine their reasons for resigning.
Capital Pride CEO Ryan Bos and Board Chair Anna Jinkerson didn’t respond to a Blade question asking if they knew why Walker or Nguyen resigned.
In response to a request by the Blade for comment on the resignations and the concern raised by Zion Peters about trans-related issues, Bos and Jinkerson sent separate statements elaborating on the organization and the board’s position on various issues.
“We can confirm that the individuals you referenced, except for Zion, no longer serve on the Capital Pride Alliance Board of Directors,” Jinkerson said in her statement.
She added that following the WorldPride festival hosted by D.C. last May and June that was organized by Capital Pride Alliance, the group anticipated a “significant level of board transition,” with many board members reaching the end of their terms. But she said many board members chose to extend their service or apply for an additional term, showing a “powerful reflection of commitment.”
Without commenting on the specific reasons for the resignations of Peterson, Walker, and Nygun, Jinkerson noted, “As with all volunteer leadership roles, transitions occur for a range of personal and professional reasons, and we appreciate those transitions with both understanding and gratitude.”
In his own statement, Bos addressed Capital Pride’s record on transgender issues.
“The Capital Pride Alliance is committed to supporting and uplifting the Trans community through our work with the Trans Coalition under the Diversity of Prides Initiative, our partnership with Earline Budd on the LGBTQ+ Burial Fund with a focus on our Trans siblings, our collaboration with the National Trans Visibility March, and our ongoing investment in programming for Transgender Day of Visibility and Transgender Day of Remembrance,” Bos said in his statement.
“We also recognize there is always continued work to be done, and we always welcome feedback from our community to ensure our commitment remains unwavering,” he said.
At the time of her resignation in February, Chandler said she could not provide specific details of the instances of sexual misconduct to which she referred in her resignation letter, or who allegedly engaged in sexual misconduct, saying she and all other board members had signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement preventing them from disclosing further details.
Board Chair Jinkerson in a statement released at that time said she and the board were aware of Chandler’s concerns but did not specifically address allegations of sexual misconduct.
“When concerns are brought to CPA, we act quickly and appropriately to address them,” she said. “As we continue to grow as an organization, we’re proactively strengthening the policies and procedures that shape our systems, our infrastructure, and the support we provide to our team and partners,” she said.
State Department
State Department implements anti-trans bathroom policy
Memo notes directive corresponds with White House executive order
The State Department on April 20 announced employees cannot use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.
The Daily Signal, a conservative news website, reported the State Department announced the new policy in a memo titled “Updates Regarding Biological Sex and Intimate Spaces, Including Restrooms.”
The State Department has not responded to the Washington Blade’s request for comment on the directive.
“The administration affirms that there are two sexes — male and female — and that federal facilities should operate on this objective and longstanding basis to ensure consistency, privacy, and safety in shared spaces,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggot told the Daily Signal. “In line with President Trump’s executive order this provides clear, uniform guidance to the department by grounding policy in biological sex as determined at birth.”
President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. The sweeping directive also ordered federal government agencies to “effectuate this policy by taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity.”
The Daily Signal notes the new State Department policy “does not prohibit single-occupancy restrooms.”
Why we need to recognize and celebrate Lesbian Day of Visibility
Prominent activists join ‘Living History’ panel at Freddie’s Beach Bar
How arts institutions built the city that politics couldn’t
DC Center marks one year at new location
Calendar: April 24-30
Inside the lonely world of MAGA gay men
PHOTOS: Night of Champions
PHOTOS: National Champagne Brunch
‘Big Mistakes’ an uneven – but worthy – comedic showcase
