National
Arlen Specter hailed as pro-gay moderate
Voted for DOMA, but later came out against anti-gay law
LGBT groups hailed former U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter for his support for LGBT rights upon his passing on Sunday despite the long-term lawmaker’s controversialĀ end in politics after he shifted party affiliation from Republican to Democratic.
On Sunday, major media outlets reported Specter had died of complications of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoniaĀ at the age of 82 in his home in Philadelphia. In 2005, Specter announced he was suffering from the disease, but continued serving as he underwent chemotherapy.
Specter for most of his career as a senator was a Republican and was known as a moderate voice within his party.
In 1996, SpecterĀ was among the Republicans who voted in favor of a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, but also voted for the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act. In 2004, Specter voted for a U.S. constitutional amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage throughout the country, but when this measure came before the Senate again in 2006, Specter ā along with Sen. Judd Gregg ā reversed his position and voted “no.”
As his re-election approached in 2010, Specter announced he could no longer be part of a party that he said was too conservative and switched his affiliation to Democrat. At the time, he also adopted a uniformly pro-LGBT voting record, not only voting for hate crimes protection legislation and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, but calling for DOMA repeal. In a piece in The Huffington Post, Specter called DOMAĀ a “relic of a more tradition-bound time and culture.”
However, after changing parties, Specter ultimately lost the Democratic nomination in his bid for re-election to former Rep. Joe Sestak, who lost in the general election to current Sen. Pat Toomey.
Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement Specter’s support for hate crimes protections and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal “was critical” as was his decision to change his position on the Federal Marriage Amendment.
“While we disagreed with his support for some conservative judicial nominees which will leave a lasting negative impact on our community, he was willing to work across party lines to get things done,” Griffin said.
Griffin added he had theĀ opportunity to host Specter in Los Angeles while working with him to raise funds for stem cell research “at a time when it was difficult for a Republican senator to speak out.”
LGBT political groups had kind words for Specter while refraining from commenting about his change in party affiliation toward the end of his career.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, commended Specter for his work and his partnership with his organization, but also recalled a personal experience with the late senator.
“Sen. Specter was a longtime ally of Log Cabin Republicans and a public servant committed to the rule of law,” Cooper said. “I remember traveling with him during the Bush administration and his keen interest in the U.S. support of civil society organizations abroad.”
Jerame Davis, executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said Specter was an important moderate voice as a Republican, but needed to become a Democrat to continue to serve as the voice of reason.
“As a Republican, Arlen Specter was a moderate and often stood with Democrats on LGBT issues,” Davis said. “In 2009, he realized he was the last of a dying breed of reasonable Republicans in the GOP and joined the Democratic Party.”
Malcolm Lazin, executive director of the Philadelphia-based Equality Forum, had kind words for the late senator.
“He was a poor Jewish boy from Kansas,” Lazin said. “Whatever he made in the world, really was as a result of his remarkable intelligence and work ethic.”
Over his course of his career as a federal prosecutor in Philadelphia in the 1970s, Lazin said he knew Specter on a personal level. The not-yet senator was an honorary campaign chair for Lazin and would advise him in meetings that took place about once a week.
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge hears case that challenges Trump passport executive order
State Department no longer issues passports with ‘X’ gender markers

A federal judge in Boston on Tuesday heard oral arguments in a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s executive order that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers.
Ashton Orr, Zaya Perysian, Sawyer Soe, Chastain Anderson, Drew Hall, Bella Boe, and Reid Solomon-Lane are the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and the private law firm Covington & Burling LPP filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The lawsuit names Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio as defendants.
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.
Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an āXā gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.
The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.
Trump signed the executive order that overturned it shortly after he took office. Rubio later directed State Department personnel to āsuspend any application requesting an āXā sex marker and do not take any further action pending additional guidance from the department.ā
āEven before Donald Trump was inaugurated, it was clear to me he wanted to control the lives and identities of transgender people like myself,ā said Orr, a transgender man who lives in West Virginia, in a press release the ACLU released before U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick heard the case. āLike many others, I rushed to update my passport hoping I could get an accurate version. Now, the State Department has suspended my application and withheld all my documents from me, including my passport, my birth certificate, and even my marriage license.”
Li Nowlin-Sohl, a staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project, described the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy as “openly discriminatory and animated by a transparent desire to drive transgender people out of public life altogether.”
Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.
WorldPride is scheduled to take place in D.C. from May 17-June 8. InterPride, the organization that coordinates WorldPride events, on March 12 issued its own travel advisory for trans and nonbinary people who want to travel to the U.S.
It is unclear when Kobick will issue her ruling.
Federal Government
Trump ‘culture war’ complicates HUD’s distribution of $3.6B in housing grants
Senate Dems call for new agreements

The disbursement of more than $3.6 billion in federal grants to housing providers has been paused for weeks while the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development seeks to condition receipt of the funding on compliance with President Donald Trump’s executive actions targeting DEI and transgender and immigrant communities.
March 4 was the statutory deadline for the agency to distribute the funds, which come through the Continuum of Care Program in support of local governments and nonprofit organizations working to promote “a community-wide commitment to the goal of ending homelessness.”
On March 13, a group of Senate Democrats led by U.S. Sens. Adam Schiff (Calif.) and Tina Smith (Minn.) wrote to HUD Secretary Scott Turner urging him to move quickly on distributing the grants and warning of the consequences that recipients are now facing and the harm they will encounter in the future if delays persist.
“To keep the lights on, providers are now being forced to draw on lines of credit at significant cost and risk to their organizations,” the senators said. “These projects enable homeless service providers to help veterans, families with children, youth, seniors, and vulnerable individuals access permanent and temporary housing, crisis counseling, and other supportive services.ā
HUD subsequently disseminated grant agreements ā and Schiff published an example on his office’s website ā that included, among other provisions, language stipulating that the awardee (1) “shall not use grant funds to promote ‘gender ideology,’ as defined in E.O. 14168, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” (2) certifies that it does not operate any programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws, and (3) agrees not to use “that funding in a manner that by design or effect facilitates the subsidization or promotion of illegal immigration or abets so-called ‘sanctuary’ policies that seek to shield illegal aliens from deportation.”
On March 14, the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals stayed a nationwide injunction enjoining three parts of Trump’s executive order on DEI, and the following day, HUD rescinded the CoC contracts and said to expect new agreements within a week as the agency was “working to revise its CoC grant agreements to be consistent with Federal law and compliant with applicable court orders.”
Schiff then led a second letter to Turner on March 19 with the Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and U.S. Sens. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D- Hawaii), and Richard Blumenthal (Conn.).
“We urge the department to immediately issue new CoC grant agreements consistent with longstanding practiceā free of the aforementioned conditionsā to ensure all individuals experiencing homelessness receive protection and support, regardless of gender identity, location, or other characteristics,” they said, requesting a response by March 31.
“The initial FY2024 grant agreements issued to CoC funding recipients contained new requirements that are deeply problematic, and likely unlawful, requirements,” the senators argued. “These mandates, such as barring shelters from serving transgender people, prohibiting DEI initiatives, and certifying that they do not support ‘sanctuary’ policies protecting noncitizens, conflict with federal civil rights, fair housing, and immigration laws, raising serious legal and constitutional concerns.”
The lawmakers noted “the harm caused by these delayed and unfulfilled CoC grant agreements will fall disproportionately on our most vulnerable populations, including women, families with children, youth, veterans, survivors of domestic and intimate partner violence, people with disabilities, and LGBTQ+ individuals.” They added, “Women experiencing homelessness ā many of whom are fleeing domestic abuse ā already face significant barriers to safety and stability, and restricting access to critical housing services will only further endanger their lives and well-being.”
Citing research that nearly one in three transgender Americans has experiences homelessness in their lives, Schiff and his colleagues stressed that “Transgender and nonbinary people in the U.S. face significant barriers to securing safe housing, with many experiencing homelessness and high rates of mistreatment and violence in shelters.”
With respect to the language in the agreements about “sanctuary” policies, the senators wrote “The organizations receiving CoC funds exist to provide critical, non-discriminatory aid to those in need, regardless of their immigration status. These organizations do not set or enforce immigration policy ā they simply fulfill their legal duty to provide life-saving and life-changing care.”
Later on March 19, HUD began issuing new contracts that did not contain the provision concerning DEI but did include the same language about “gender ideology” and “sanctuary” policies.
U.S. Federal Courts
Court halts removal of two transgender service members
Case challenging anti-trans military ban proceeds in D.C.

A federal court in New Jersey issued a temporary restraining order on Monday that will halt the separation of two transgender service members from the U.S. military while their case in D.C. challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s ban moves forward.
The order by Judge Christine O’Hearn pauses proceedings against Staff Sgt. Nicholas Bear Bade and Master Sgt. Logan Ireland, who “have been pulled from key deployments and placed on administrative absence against their will because of the ban,” according to a joint press release Monday by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLAD Law, which are representing the service members together with other litigants in Ireland v. Hegseth and in the case underway in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Talbott v. Trump.
“That court granted a preliminary injunction March 18 barring the Department of Defense from implementing the ban, finding that it discriminates based on sex and transgender status; that it is ‘soaked in animus;’ and that, due to the governmentās failure to present any evidence supporting the ban, it is ‘highly unlikely’ to survive any level of judicial review,” the groups noted in their press release.
Ireland spoke with the Washington Blade in January along with other trans service members and former service members who shared their experiences with the military and their feelings on the new administration’s efforts to bar trans people from the U.S. armed forces.
-
Opinions2 days ago
Finding the courage to flee U.S. to save my trans daughter
-
District of Columbia3 days ago
D.C. queer bar owners sound alarm on WorldPride security concerns
-
Advice5 days ago
I want to leave my perfect boyfriend
-
District of Columbia2 days ago
First D.C. LGBTQ seniors home readyĀ to open