National
Marines prohibit anti-gay discrimination at spousal clubs
But change won’t affect Ft. Bragg controversy


The Marine Corps has new policy prohibiting spousal clubs from discriminating against gay partners (Public domain photo by Charlie Chavez)
The Marine Corps has adopted a new policy requiring all spousal clubs operating on its installations to admit same-sex partners or face eviction, although the new policy doesn’t extend to a spouses’ club at North Carolina’s Ft. Bragg that has been the subject of controversy.
According to the Associated Press, the Marine Corps Commandant’s Staff Judge Advocate Major Gen. Vaughn Ary sent an email to legal offices throughout the service noting spousal clubs must adhere to a non-discrimination policy that includes various categories including gender. Ary reportedly said discrimination against same-sex couples would qualify as gender discrimination.
“We would interpret a spouses club’s decision to exclude a same-sex spouse as sexual discrimination because the exclusion was based upon the spouse’s sex,” the memo reportedly states.
Capt. Eric Flanagan, a Marine Corps spokesperson, told the Washington Blade the service can’t control the actions of independent organizations, but anticipates compliance.
“While the Marine Corps cannot directly control the actions of independent organizations such as spouses’ clubs, we expect that all who are interested in supporting Marine Corps Family Readiness would be welcome to participate and will be treated with dignity and respect,” Flanagan said.
The memo comes on the heels of controversy at the Association of Bragg Officers’ Spouses in Army’s Fort Bragg in North Carolina, which denied admission to a same-sex spouse. Ashley Broadway, the wife of Fort Bragg-based Army Lt. Col. Heather Mack, was denied admittance to that club.
The Marine Corps email reportedly refers to the controversy at the Army base and said the event had “caused quite a stir” cautioning, “We do not want a story like this developing in our backyard.”
Allyson Robinson, executive director of OutServe-SLDN, praised the new Marine Corps policy and urged Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to make a similar policy effective for all services within the U.S. military.
“The Marine Corps guidance issued today is a breakthrough and a clear indication that General Amos meant what he said when he promised Marines would lead the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,'” Robinson said. “Secretary Panetta should use his authority immediately to bring consistency across the services with regard to this issue and in doing so, a greater measure of equity to gay and lesbian service members and their families.”
The Defense Department didn’t respond in time for this posting to a request for comment on whether the Marine Corps policy would be extended across other services.
According to OutServe-SLDN, Broadway was notified in an email that Fort Bragg will issue “Friends of Bragg” passes to same-sex spouses that show a marriage certificate and whose military spouse sponsors them. According to the organization, that pass — which is specific to Fort Bragg — will allow the spouses access to the installation without going through the inspection lane, but won’t however, allow shopping privileges at the post exchange or commissary, nor any other service granted to military dependents. There’s no indication that the Association of Bragg Officers’ Spouses will grant membership based on this “Friends” pass.
“The ‘consolation prize’ offered by Ft. Bragg’s leaders to Ashley Broadway and others does nothing to remedy the situation at hand — the ongoing discrimination by the Association of Bragg Officers’ Spouses — nor does it truly advance equity for gay and lesbian service members and their families,” Robinson said. “Ft. Bragg had the opportunity to lead here. Instead, its leaders delayed, equivocated and made excuses. Now that opportunity is lost.”
LGBT advocates have been calling for a secretarial directive to implement certain benefits for troops with same-sex partners — such as joint duty assignments, issuance of military IDs, use of the commissary and family housing — which are offered to troops with opposite-sex spouses. The Pentagon has said it has been examining this issue since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was lifted in 2011, but no action has been taken.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.
In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”
In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.
The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.
“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.
He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”
“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”
Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”
Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.
Federal Government
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”
The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.
“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”
Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”
Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”
“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”
Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.
Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.
The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”