Connect with us

National

LGBT issues again absent from prez debate

Invigorated Obama takes on Romney in spirited town hall

Published

on

President Obama (right) and Mitt Romney are set to square off on domestic issues at next week's debate in Denver (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Obama squared off in a town hall debate Tuesday. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The town hall presidential debate on Tuesday night included references to social issues, such as women’s rights, immigration and gun violence but as in the previous debate, there was no explicit mention of LGBT issues.

During the debate at Hofstra University, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney brought up his belief in marriage as a means to reduce the culture of violence in response to a question about banning assault weapons, saying “we need moms and dads helping raise kids” and espousing “the benefit of having two parents in the home.”

“A lot of great single moms, single dads,” Romney said. “But gosh, to tell our kids that before they have babies, they ought to think about getting married to someone — that’s a great idea because if there’s a two-parent family, the prospect of living in poverty goes down dramatically. The opportunities that the child will — will be able to achieve increase dramatically.”

Romney never explicitly said he was excluding opposite-sex couples when touting the importance of a “two-parent family” as the correct way to raise children, but didn’t take the opportunity to say that marriage should be between one man, one woman.

He has previously stated that gay couples shouldn’t be allowed to marry and supports a U.S. constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage throughout the country.

The Romney campaign didn’t immediately respond to the Washington Blade’s request to clarify the marriage remarks, but LGBT rights groups on both sides of the aisle had differing interpretations of the candidate’s intended meaning.

Jerame Davis, executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said even though Romney didn’t mention same-sex couples in his remarks, the candidate’s past hostility toward LGBT people speaks for itself.

“Whether or not it was intentional, Mitt Romney has absolutely no respect for LGBT families,” Davis said. “His opposition to marriage equality and even civil unions makes clear that he really doesn’t believe our families are equal or deserving of the same status as other families.”

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said he didn’t believe Romney’s remarks were exclusionary based on comments he’s made at other times.

“I don’t think that was intended to be an exclusionary statement because he has made comments in support on [same-sex parent] adoption, and later in his closing comments, he made a reference to all of us being children of God,” Cooper said.

Romney once articulated that same-sex parent adoption was a “right” over the course of the presidential campaign, but later clarified his position in May to state he merely acknowledges the right of states to enable adoption by same-sex parents if they choose.

President Obama made a reference to opposing discrimination during the presidential debate in response to a question on pay equity for women, though he said nothing explicit on LGBT issues.

“And we’ve also got to make sure that in every walk of life, we do not tolerate discrimination,” Obama said. “That’s been one of the hallmarks of my administration. I’m going to continue to push on this issue for the next four years.”

Obama supports marriage equality and pushed for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as president — although he hasn’t spelled out what he would do to further advance LGBT rights if re-elected.

But these were the only times that any discussion remotely related to LGBT issues took place at the debate in Hempstead, N.Y. It’s unlikely LGBT issues will come up during the final debate next week because it’ll focus on foreign policy.

But other social issues emerged during the debate. On immigration, Romney said he doesn’t support amnesty for undocumented immigrants or offering them legal driver’s licenses, but took Obama to task for not accomplishing immigration reform over the course of his first term. Obama criticized Romney for his hard-line views on the issue, noting the GOP candidate has said he’d veto the DREAM Act.

Speaking about the inclusion of women in his administration, Romney made a gaffe when he said he was brought “binders full of women” as governor of Massachusetts that he said led him to appoint more women in senior leadership positions than any other state in America.

Heather Cronk, managing director of GetEQUAL, was disappointed by the lack of LGBT inclusion in the debate.

“In a debate that reduced marriage to a remedy for gun violence and workplace equality to women in a binder, it was hard for LGBT folks to see ourselves as part of a substantive and robust political conversation,” Cronk said. “The partisan folks will surely come out of the woodwork over the next few days to claim victory for one side or the other, but we still haven’t seen either candidate describe a path to victory for LGBT Americans — to be fully equal under the law.”

Most observers said Obama needed a win during the debate to come back after what was deemed a listless performance during the previous debate that preceded a drop for him in the polls. According to a CNN poll made public after the debate, 46 percent of respondents said Obama won the debate, compared with 39 percent for Romney.

But another poll of undecided voters showed mixed views. A CBS News/Knowledge networks poll of undecided voters who watched the debate found 37 percent said Obama won, 30 percent favored Mitt Romney and 33 percent called the debate a tie.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

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

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

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.

Continue Reading

National

Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information

Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources

Published

on

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is named as a defendant in the lawsuit. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

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.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections

Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent

Published

on

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Screen capture: YouTube)

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.

Continue Reading

Popular