Local
Wolfson’s comments on Md. marriage campaign ‘a big fat lie’
Freedom to Marry blasted for taking credit for Election Day victory
Freedom to Marry President Evan Wolfson’s post-Election Day comments about the role his organization played in the pro-Question 6 campaign raised more than a few eyebrows among Maryland’s same-sex marriage advocates.
“We took the lead on raising early money for three of the four states and left others to do the same in Maryland,” he told the Baltimore Sun in an article published on Nov. 10. “When it became clear that others had not stepped up, Freedom to Marry stepped up again. We always thought Maryland could do it.”
One advocate familiar with the Maryland campaign, who spoke to the Blade on condition of anonymity, blasted Wolfson’s remarks.
“That quote was a big fat lie,” the source said. “Evan did everything within his power to make fundraising for the Maryland campaign difficult if not impossible. He was constantly speaking to national donors telling them that the Maryland campaign couldn’t win. So for him to now recreate history is the height of hypocrisy.”
Freedom to Marry said in a Nov. 7 press release it had contributed $7 million to the four statewide marriage campaigns during this election cycle. This figure includes $4.6 million in cash and in-kind contributions and $2.4 million that funded public education efforts.
A campaign finance report filed with Maine election officials on Oct. 24 indicates the Freedom to Marry Maine PAC gave $1,201,104.84 in cash and $34,645.19 in in-kind donations to the pro-Question 1 campaign. Freedom to Marry Minnesota PAC donated $866,406.56 in cash and $26,838.51 in-kind donations to the campaign opposed to a state constitutional amendment that would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman, according to an Oct. 24 campaign finance report.
A series of “National Engagement Parties” that took place in D.C., New York, San Francisco and other cities across the country last month raised $500,000 for the statewide marriage campaigns in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington.
Freedom to Marry initially declined to join the coalition of groups defending Maryland’s same-sex law, but it formed a political action committee in September that allowed it to contribute to the pro-Question 6 effort.
A campaign finance report filed with Maryland election officials on Oct. 13 indicates the Freedom to Marry Maryland PAC gave $30,000 to the NAACP National Voter Fund for Question 6. Josh Levin, campaign manager of Marylanders for Marriage Equality, acknowledged to the Washington Blade during a post-election interview the $70,000 Freedom to Marry contributed in the final days of the campaign allowed a radio ad highlighting President Obama’s support of marriage rights for same-sex couples to air.
The Human Rights Campaign contributed more than $1.5 million in cash and in-kind contributions to the pro-Question 6 campaign.
“Certainly we had been in touch with them all year and I was glad that they did decide to come in and make some contributions at the end,” Levin said when asked about Freedom to Marry’s contributions to Marylanders for Marriage Equality. “There are folks over there who have been working on this issue for a long time, but I think what we realized early on was that we were going to have to chart our own path here in Maryland and we were going to have to raise much of the money in-state, which we did.
“And I think we realized too that the message that Freedom to Marry was using and that they used successfully in the other three states was not quite the right one for Maryland. And I think the results bear that out. We focused on doing our research and we had a team of folks who really knew Maryland, but who also had been working on marriage and equality issues for a long time, but who also knew Maryland. And I think because of that we were able to come up with a strategy that worked here. I’m very glad that we did because we saw it resonate.”
Gay state Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Montgomery County) echoed Levin’s remarks. He noted to the Blade that Freedom to Marry contributed “about 2 percent of the resources that we had.”
“It’s fortunate HRC was willing to say this is something worth engaging in and funding,” said Madaleno. “I was surprised to see Evan’s quotes in the Sun and can only hope that it was — something was lost in the interview process. While I think Freedom to Marry can claim credit for helping us be in the position to win all four states, I don’t think they can be in a position to claim credit for the win in Maryland, not certainly like HRC.”
Wolfson sought to clarify his comments in a letter-to-the-editor he submitted to the Baltimore Sun on Nov. 12.
“I regret some unintended implications in my quotes in Saturday’s story regarding the freedom to marry win in Maryland,” he wrote.
Wolfson told the Blade in a statement on Tuesday that Freedom to Marry “invested $200,000 in the 2011-2012 push to win marriage in Maryland, building on years of support and engagement over several rounds.” He added his organization is “proud to have contributed in big ways and small, public and unsung, as part of what we all did right to move Maryland to the right side of history.”
“And whatever the occasional disagreements, we owe a huge debt of thanks to the local leaders and families, campaign manager Josh Levin and his team, Gov. [Martin] O’Malley and key lawmakers, Equality Maryland, Human Rights Campaign, the ACLU, the NAACP, Republicans and Democrats, and the many, many volunteers and voices who joined in making the case to voters that led to victory in Maryland alongside our movement’s wins in other states,” said Wolfson.
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
The Comings & Goings column also invites LGBTQ+ college students to share their successes with us. If you have been elected to a student government position, gotten an exciting internship, or are graduating and beginning your career with a great job, let us know so we can share your success.
Congratulations to David Reid on his new position as Principal, Public Policy, with Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck. Upon being named to the position, he said, “I am proud to be part of this inaugural group of principals as the firm launches it new ‘principal, public policy’ title.”
Reid is a political strategist and operative. He is a prolific fundraiser, and skilled advocate for legislative and appropriations goals. He is deeply embedded in Democratic politics, drawing on his personal network on the Hill, in governors’ administrations, and throughout the business community, to build coalitions that drive policy successes for clients. His work includes leading complex public policy efforts related to infrastructure, hospitality, gaming, health care, technology, telecommunications, and arts and entertainment.
Reid has extensive political finance experience. He leads Brownstein’s bipartisan political operation each cycle with Republican and Democratic congressional and national campaign committees and candidates. Reid is an active member of Brownstein’s pro-bono committee and co-leads the firm’s LGBT+ Employee Resource Group.
He serves as a Deputy National Finance Chair of the Democratic National Committee and is a member of the Finance Committee of the Democratic Governors Association, where he previously served as the Deputy Finance Director.
Prior to joining Brownstein, Reid served as the Washington D.C. and PAC finance director at Hillary for America. He worked as the mid-Atlantic finance director, for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and ran the political finance operation of a Fortune 50 global health care company.
Among his many outside involvements, Reid serves on the executive committee of the One Victory, and LGBTQ Victory Institute board, the governing bodies of the LGBTQ Victory Fund and Institute; and is a member of the board for Q Street.
Congratulations also to Yesenia Alvarado Henninger of Helion Energy, president; Abigail Harris of Honeywell; Alex Catanese of American Bankers Association; Stu Malec, secretary; Brendan Neal, treasurer; Brownstein’s David Reid; Amazon’s Suzanne Beall; Lowe’s’ Rob Curis; andCornerstone’s Christian Walker. Their positions have now been confirmed by the Q Street Board of Directors.
District of Columbia
D.C. pays $500,000 to settle lawsuit brought by gay Corrections Dept. employee
Alleged years of verbal harassment, slurs, intimidation
The D.C. government on Feb. 5 agreed to pay $500,000 to a gay D.C. Department of Corrections officer as a settlement to a lawsuit the officer filed in 2021 alleging he was subjected to years of discrimination at his job because of his sexual orientation, according to a statement released by the American Civil Liberties Union of D.C.
The statement says the lawsuit, filed on behalf of Sgt. Deon Jones by the ACLU of D.C. and the law firm WilmerHale, alleged that the Department of Corrections, including supervisors and co-workers, “subjected Sgt. Jones to discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment because of his identity as a gay man, in violation of the D.C. Human Rights Act.”
Daniel Gleick, a spokesperson for D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, said the mayor’s office would have no comment on the lawsuit settlement. The Washington Blade couldn’t immediately reach a spokesperson for the Office of the D.C. Attorney General, which represents the city against lawsuits.
Bowser and her high-level D.C. government appointees, including Japer Bowles, director of the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs, have spoken out against LGBTQ-related discrimination.
“Jones, now a 28-year veteran of the Department and nearing retirement, faced years of verbal abuse and harassment from coworkers and incarcerated people alike, including anti-gay slurs, threats, and degrading treatment,” the ACLU’s statement says.
“The prolonged mistreatment took a severe toll on Jones’s mental health, and he experienced depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and 15 anxiety attacks in 2021 alone,” it says.
“For years, I showed up to do my job with professionalism and pride, only to be targeted because of who I am,” Jones says in the ACLU statement. “This settlement affirms that my pain mattered – and that creating hostile workplaces has real consequences,” he said.
He added, “For anyone who is LGBTQ or living with a disability and facing workplace discrimination or retaliation, know this: you are not powerless. You have rights. And when you stand up, you can achieve justice.”
The settlement agreement, a link to which the ACLU provided in its statement announcing the settlement, states that plaintiff Jones agrees, among other things, that “neither the Parties’ agreement, nor the District’s offer to settle the case, shall in any way be construed as an admission by the District that it or any of its current or former employees, acted wrongfully with respect to Plaintiff or any other person, or that Plaintiff has any rights.”
Scott Michelman, the D.C. ACLU’s legal director said that type of disclaimer is typical for parties that agree to settle a lawsuit like this.
“But actions speak louder than words,” he told the Blade. “The fact that they are paying our client a half million dollars for the pervasive and really brutal harassment that he suffered on the basis of his identity for years is much more telling than their disclaimer itself,” he said.
The settlement agreement also says Jones would be required, as a condition for accepting the agreement, to resign permanently from his job at the Department of Corrections. Michelman said Jones has been on leave from work for a period of time, but he did not know how long. Jones couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.
“This is really something that makes sense on both sides,” Michelman said of the resignation requirements. “The environment had become so toxic the way he had been treated on multiple levels made it difficult to see how he could return to work there.”
Virginia
Spanberger signs bill that paves way for marriage amendment repeal referendum
Proposal passed in two successive General Assembly sessions
Virginians this year will vote on whether to repeal a state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger on Friday signed state Del. Laura Jane Cohen (D-Fairfax County)’s House Bill 612, which finalized the referendum’s language.
The ballot question that voters will consider on Election Day is below:
Question: Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to: (i) remove the ban on same-sex marriage; (ii) affirm that two adults may marry regardless of sex, gender, or race; and (iii) require all legally valid marriages to be treated equally under the law?
Voters in 2006 approved the Marshall-Newman Amendment.
Same-sex couples have been able to legally marry in Virginia since 2014. Former Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who is a Republican, in 2024 signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.
Two successive legislatures must approve a proposed constitutional amendment before it can go to the ballot.
A resolution to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment passed in the General Assembly in 2025. Lawmakers once again approved it last month.
“20 years after Virginia added a ban on same-sex marriage to our Constitution, we finally have the chance to right that wrong,” wrote Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman on Friday in a message to her group’s supporters.
Virginians this year will also consider proposed constitutional amendments that would guarantee reproductive rights and restore voting rights to convicted felons who have completed their sentences.
-
Virginia4 days agoHashmi speaks at Equality Virginia Lobby Day
-
District of Columbia4 days agoNorton hailed as champion of LGBTQ rights
-
Maryland4 days ago4th Circuit dismisses lawsuit against Montgomery County schools’ pronoun policy
-
District of Columbia3 days agoD.C. Council gives first approval to amended PrEP insurance bill

