Connect with us

Local

O’Malley, Hoyer attend pro-Question 6 rally

Roughly 200 students joined elected officials and others in College Park

Published

on

Martin O'Malley, Question 6, election 2012, Maryland, gay marriage, same sex marriage, gay news, Washington Blade
Martin O'Malley, Question 6, election 2012, Maryland, gay marriage, same sex marriage, gay news, Washington Blade

Governor Martin O’Malley speaks at a pro-Question 6 rally at the University of Maryland in College Park on Nov. 5 (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

COLLEGE PARK, Md.—Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley on Monday urged young people to vote for the state’s same-sex marriage law on Election Day.

“Tomorrow we’re going to put the ‘for’ in forward,” he told roughly 200 people who attended a pro-Question 6 rally at the University of Maryland. The governor also spoke at a similar event earlier in the day in Baltimore. “As a country we move forward and not back. I have four kids — and my daughters are no longer kids, they’re your age. They’re 21 and 20. And when it comes to Question 6, they look at some of us older people — that is to say those over 40 — and they say, what is wrong with you guys? What about this thing do you not get? Every person should be treated fairly and equally under the law. That’s what it means to be an American, isn’t it?”

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.,) whose daughter Stefany came out to the Washington Blade in an interview in June, pointed out the first bill for which he voted in the Maryland state Senate was the measure that repealed the state’s ban on interracial marriages. He said marriage rights for gays and lesbians upholds the promises of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

“There is zero doubt in my mind that who you love or others love will not impede on who I love or who I have a relationship with or the values that I hold,” said Hoyer. “This is about the substance of America and every individual is endowed not by their government but by their God with certain unalienable rights.”

Steny Hoyer, Martin O'Malley, Question 6, Maryland, gay marriage, same sex marriage, gay news, Washington Blade

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer speaks at pro-Question 6 rally at the University of Maryland in College Park on Nov. 5. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

Kiese Hanson of the University of Maryland Student Government Association also urged her classmates to vote for Question 6.

“My parents raised me to believe that there should not be boundaries put on love, and I learned that everyone should be treated fairly and equally,” she said. “The best quality of the human race is our ability to love. Why would we restrict those from demonstrating this quality of our existence? Maryland has the opportunity to do something special to be the first state to pass marriage equality at the ballot and guarantee that no one in our state is restricted from loving who they want to love.”

A Goucher College poll released on Oct. 29 found 55 percent of Marylanders support marriage rights for same-sex couples in the state, compared to 39 percent who oppose them. A Washington Post survey published on Oct. 18 noted 52 percent of Maryland voters support Question 6, compared to 42 percent who said they oppose it.

A third poll the Baltimore Sun conducted between Oct. 20-23 noted only 46 percent of respondents would vote for the law O’Malley signed in March.

Question 6 opponents continue to maintain the same-sex marriage law O’Malley signed in March does not protect religious freedom. Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council and others argue marriage between one man and one woman is necessary to produce children.

“As a pastor, I cannot stand on the side of those who would attempt to justify legalized discrimination under the guise of religious belief,” said Rev. Delman Coates of Mount Ennon Baptist Church in Clinton. “The denial of rights to some based upon religious beliefs sets the precedent for the denial of rights to others based on religious belief. And that is a very dangerous public policy precedent to establish in America. As a Christian and as an American, I believe my charge is to live in my faith, not to legislate it. And I therefore urge Marylanders to vote for Question 6 because it does not force any religious institution or any clergyperson to perform any union that is against their religious beliefs or practices.”

State Sen. Allan Kittleman (R-Howard and Carroll Counties) stressed he feels nuptials for gays and lesbians is increasingly becoming a bi-partisan issue. He is one of two GOP lawmakers who voted for the same-sex marriage bill in Annapolis earlier this year.

“I see it as a very Republican principle,” said Kittleman. “I believe conservative principles mean that gov’t should not be intruding on your personal freedoms.”

Maryland voters on Election Day will also consider three other ballot questions that would allow undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities, expand gambling and approve redrawn congressional districts.

O’Malley’s office did not return the Washington Blade’s request for comment on a state campaign finance report that indicates the company behind the development of National Harbor in Prince George’s County donated $271,515 to a group opposed to both Question 6 and the Dream Act. The governor continues to maintain expanded gambling in the state would generate more jobs and money for education.

Back at the University of Maryland, gay state Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Montgomery County) thanked O’Malley for his efforts in support of Question 6.

“He has worked day and night to make sure not only Question 6, but all of the ballot questions succeed tomorrow in Annapolis,” he said. “I can’t tell you on behalf of my family, my kids, all the gay and lesbian families of our state, your work has been truly amazing. And we will never adequately express our gratitude for you.”

Lesbian state Del. Heather Mizeur (D-Montgomery County) and Bob Ross, president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s Prince George’s County Branch were among those who also attended the rally.

“We’re here because it’s time to right a wrong,” said NAACP Washington Bureau Director Hilary Shelton. “It’s time for us to take the issue on head first.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case

Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge

Published

on

Sean Charles Dunn was found not guilty on Thursday. (Washington Blade file photo by Joe Reberkenny)

A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10. 

Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets. 

Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers  standing in front of the shop.

 Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.

 “I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.

 “And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”

The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.

Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured. 

Prosecutors  with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.

“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”

The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1. 

Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom. 

Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various  provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.

The dispute over the intricacies of  the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.

Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called  “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.

DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.

“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.

Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.

Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident. 

“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it  was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.” 

“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.

“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.

Continue Reading

Maryland

Democrats hold leads in almost every race of Annapolis municipal election

Jared Littmann ahead in mayor’s race.

Published

on

Preliminary election results from Tuesday show Democrats likely will remain in control of Annapolis City Hall. Jared Littmann thanks his wife, Marlene Niefeld, as he addresses supporters after polls closed Tuesday night. (Photo by Rick Hutzell for the Baltimore Banner)

By CODY BOTELER | The Democratic candidates in the Annapolis election held early leads in the races for mayor and nearly every city council seat, according to unofficial results released on election night.

Jared Littmann, a former alderman and the owner of K&B Ace Hardware, did not go so far as to declare victory in his race to be the next mayor of Annapolis, but said he’s optimistic that the mail-in ballots to be counted later this week will support his lead.

Littmannn said November and December will “fly by” as he plans to meet with the city department heads and chiefs to “pepper them with questions.”

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.

Continue Reading

Virginia

Democrats increase majority in Va. House of Delegates

Tuesday was Election Day in state.

Published

on

Virginia Capitol (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Democrats on Tuesday increased their majority in the Virginia House of Delegates.

The Associated Press notes the party now has 61 seats in the chamber. Democrats before Election Day had a 51-48 majority in the House.

All six openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual candidates — state Dels. Rozia Henson (D-Prince William County), Laura Jane Cohen (D-Fairfax County), Joshua Cole (D-Fredericksburg), Marcia Price (D-Newport News), Adele McClure (D-Arlington County), and Mark Sickles (D-Fairfax County) — won re-election.

Lindsey Dougherty, a bisexual Democrat, defeated state Del. Carrie Coyner (R-Chesterfield County) in House District 75 that includes portions of Chesterfield and Prince George Counties. (Attorney General-elect Jay Jones in 2022 texted Coyner about a scenario in which he shot former House Speaker Todd Gilbert, a Republican.)

Other notable election results include Democrat John McAuliff defeating state Del. Geary Higgins (R-Loudoun County) in House District 30. Former state Del. Elizabeth Guzmán beat state Del. Ian Lovejoy (R-Prince William County) in House District 22.

Democrats increased their majority in the House on the same night they won all three statewide offices: governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general.

Narissa Rahaman is the executive director of Equality Virginia Advocates, the advocacy branch of Equality Virginia, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy group, last week noted the election results will determine the future of LGBTQ rights, reproductive freedom, and voting rights in the state.

Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin in 2024 signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.

The General Assembly earlier this year approved a resolution that seeks to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment that defines marriage in the state constitution as between a man and a woman. The resolution must pass in two successive legislatures before it can go to the ballot.

Shreya Jyotishi contributed to this article.

Continue Reading

Popular