Connect with us

National

Hagel apologizes for 1998 anti-gay remarks

Potential defense sec’y nominee commits to support open LGBT service

Published

on

Former U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel apologized on Friday for an anti-gay comment made in 1998 (public domain photo by Lance Cpl. Casey Jones)

Former U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel apologized for an anti-gay slur in 1998 (public domain photo by Lance Cpl. Casey Jones)

The former U.S. senator whom President Obama is reportedly considering for defense secretary on Friday apologized for using anti-gay remarks 14 years ago to describe a gay nominee for U.S. ambassador.

In a statement, received by the Washington Post and other media outlets, Chuck Hagel responded to comments that he reportedly made in 1998 about then-nominee for U.S. ambassador Jim Hormel, now a San Francisco-based philanthropist, in addition to expressing a newfound commitment to LGBT rights.

“My comments 14 years ago in 1998 were insensitive,” Hagel was quoted as saying Friday. “They do not reflect my views or the totality of my public record, and I apologize to Ambassador Hormel and any LGBT Americans who may question my commitment to their civil rights. I am fully supportive of ‘open service’ and committed to LGBT military families.”

The comments about Hormel, published in 1998 by the Omaha World-Herald, came to light in recent days amid questions about whether Hagel would support LGBT service members as defense secretary. At the time, Hagel reportedly denigrated Hormel for being “openly aggressively gay.”

“Ambassadorial posts are sensitive,” Hagel was quoted as saying at the time. “They are representing America. They are representing our lifestyle, our values, our standards. And I think it is an inhibiting factor to be gay — openly aggressively gay like Mr. Hormel — to do an effective job.”

Representing the conservative state of Nebraska as U.S. senator from 1997 to 2009, Hagel was known for his opposition to LGBT rights, from 2001 to 2006, Hagel consistently scored a “0” on the Human Rights Campaign’s scorecards between 2001 and 2006.

In 1999, he voiced opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, telling the New York Times, ”The U.S. armed forces aren’t some social experiment.” Hagel voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004, but didn’t cast a vote in 2006.

Hagel’s record in the Senate was troublesome to LGBT rights supporters, who are pushing the Pentagon to grant additional partner benefits to gay service members — such as joint duty assignments, issuance of military IDs, use of the commissary and family housing — through administrative changes as well as the implementation of open service by transgender people.

According to the Washington Post, LGBT advocates held phone calls in recent days with senior White House aides — including senior adviser to President Obama, Valerie Jarrett — over concerns about the Hagel nomination. The aides reportedly told the activists that any defense secretary nominee would “live up to the principles” on LGBT rights already established by Obama.

During a news conference on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney responded to concerns over the potential Hagel nomination by emphasizing the former senator’s service to the country.

“I have no announcements to make about personnel matters,” Carney said. “I can simply say that Sen. Hagel has been a remarkable servant to this country, a recipient of two Purple Hearts. He fought for this country and has served this country admirably in a number of capacities. Beyond that, I think I’ll let the president make any announcements about personnel when the time is right.”

LGBT advocates responded by saying they appreciate Hagel’s statement on Friday and look forward to working with him on lingering LGBT issues for the U.S. armed forces.

Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said Hagel’s statement demonstrates an evolution on the part of the former senator — and the country as a whole.

“Senator Hagel’s apology and his statement of support for LGBT equality is appreciated and shows just how far as a country we have come when a conservative former Senator from Nebraska can have a change of heart on LGBT issues,” Griffin said. “Our community continues to add allies to our ranks and we’re proud that Senator Hagel is one of them.”

On the future for LGBT military issues, Griffin added, “The next Defense Secretary should get off to a fast start and ensure LGBT military families have access to every possible benefit under the law. Every day these families continue to face unfair treatment and the Secretary can take meaningful action to remedy this discrimination.”

Allyson Robinson, executive director of OutServe-SLDN, expressed similar satisfaction with Hagel’s words on Friday.

“We are pleased that Senator Hagel recognized the importance of retracting his previous statement about Ambassador Hormel and affirming his commitment to ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal and LGBT military families,” Robinson said. “We look forward to learning more about his commitment to full LGBT military equality as this confirmation process unfolds.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Military/Pentagon

Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.

The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.

The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”

The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.

Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.

The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.

The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.

Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.

“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.

Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.

“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.

The Washington Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.

While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.

“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”

He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.

“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”

“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”

Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.

“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”

She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.

“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”

Continue Reading

National

Results from key Tuesday primary races

Published

on

Democratic State Sen. Scott Wiener (Photo courtesy of Scott Wiener)

State officials in California had not called the governor’s race as of Wednesday morning but Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra appear likely to advance to the general election. 

The race for governor has been scrambled several times after Kamala Harris opted not to run, Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out after sexual misconduct allegations surfaced, and Rep. Katie Porter’s campaign fizzled. Becerra would be the state’s first Latino governor since 1875 if elected. Hilton was endorsed by President Trump. 

In the Los Angeles mayor’s race, the AP declared that incumbent Mayor Karen Bass will advance to the Nov. 3 runoff while former reality TV star Spencer Pratt and LA Council member Nithya Raman were competing for second place. California is notoriously slow in counting ballots and only about half of the results were available by Wednesday morning.

In San Francisco, Democratic State Sen. Scott Wiener advanced to the general election in November, besting Supervisor Connie Chan, who was endorsed by House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi is retiring from Congress after nearly 40 years in the House.

In Iowa, Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek won the primary for an open U.S. Senate seat, defeating state Sen. Zach Wahls. Turek will face Rep. Ashley Hinson, who won the GOP primary with President Donald Trump’s endorsement, in the general election.  

The Iowa seat is open because Sen. Joni Ernst (R) decided not to seek re-election. The primary was closely watched by LGBTQ advocates because Wahls rose to national prominence after a speech he made defending marriage equality went viral in 2011. Wahls was raised by a lesbian couple. 

Continue Reading

National

White House Correspondents’ Dinner rescheduled after shooting

‘We will not allow an act of violence to have the last word’

Published

on

The scene inside April’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner after shots rang out. (Washington Blade photo by Joe Reberkenny)

The White House Correspondents’ Association announced on Tuesday that it has rescheduled its annual dinner for July 24 after the April event was halted when gunshots rang out at the Washington Hilton.

Cole Allen, 31, is charged with the attempted assassination of President Trump, who was in the ballroom at the time of the incident. One Secret Service officer was wounded in the attack. Officers stopped Allen before he could enter the ballroom where 2,500 journalists and politicos were having dinner and waiting for Trump to speak. It was Trump’s first time attending as president.

“We will not allow an act of violence to have the last word, especially during a year when we are reflecting on the 250th anniversary of America and everything we stand for,” said WHCA President Weijia Jiang in a statement to members. 

She did not announce further details, including venue and ticketing. 

Washington Blade White House reporter Joe Reberkenny was in the audience when shots were fired and reported live on social media from the scene.  

This post will be updated as more details are announced.

Continue Reading

Popular