Connect with us

National

Dept. of Education to recognize same-sex parents

Change will likely result in less aid for same-sex households

Published

on

Arne Duncan, Department of Education, Washington Blade, gay news
Arne Duncan, Department of Education, Washington Blade, gay news

The Department of Education under Arne Duncan will begin recognizing a student’s same-sex partners on FAFSA. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The Department of Education will begin recognizing a student’s same-sex parents on applications for federal financial aid for the purposes of income information, although in most circumstances the change will likely result in these families being eligible for less assistance.

In an announcement on Monday, the department announced it will begin collecting income information from a dependent student’s legal parents regardless of their marital status or gender as long as those parents live together. The change begins with the 2014-2015 Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA.

The precise changes are two-fold. First, the application will offer an option for students to describe their parents’ marital status as “unmarried and both parents living together.” Second, where appropriate, the new FAFSA form will use terms like “Parent 1 (father/mother/stepparent)” and “Parent 2 (father/mother/stepparent)” instead of gender-specific terms like “mother” or “father.”

In a conference call with reporters, Education Secretary Arne Duncan said the change will enable students to apply for aid “in a way that incorporates their unique family dynamic.”

“These changes will allow us to calculate eligibility based on what a student’s whole family is able to contribute and ensure that limited taxpayer dollars are better targeted toward those students who have the most need,” Duncan said. “And very importantly, these changes allow us to provide an inclusive form that reflects the great diversity of American families.”

The income information provided on the FAFSA is used to calculate a student’s expected family contribution, or EFC. That number decides a student’s eligibility for federal need-based student aid, such as grants and students loans, in addition to eligibility for many state, institutional and private aid programs.

Prior to this change, FAFSA was constructed to collect information about a student’s parents only if they’re married. Consequently, it has excluded income and other information from some students’ legal parents when those parents are unmarried, the same gender and the same gender and legally married but not recognized as such under the Defense of Marriage Act.

According to the Department of Education, collecting of information from both of a dependent student’s parents is statutorily supported in the Higher Education Act. Additionally, the change won’t impact the longstanding statutorily required provision of considering information — if a student’s parents are divorced — on only the parent that the student has lived with for the greater portion of one year before completing the FAFSA.

While the change is intended to be more inclusive of LGBT families, the Department of Education maintains it’ll result in most situations with these students being eligible for less assistance.

In most instances, the amount of need-based federal student aid these students are eligible for will decrease because of the additional income and other resources used in the calculation of the student’s EFC. Still, in a small number of instances, the student would be eligible for more aid because the offset for an additional person in the household, a factor in calculating the EFC, will exceed the income of the second parent.

Duncan maintained the change would result in “fairer treatment of all families,” but acknowledged that it will likely result in same-sex households having to pay more for a student’s education.

“For the vast majority of applicants, these changes will absolutely have no impact,” Duncan said. “It’s important to note, though, that collecting information from both parents and considering the income of the whole family will likely result in less need-based federal student aid for these applicants who are affected because of the recognition of the complete financial resources of the family.”

Duncan also said the change will also affect both students with opposite-sex parents if those parents are unmarried, but living together.

“We know college is very, very expensive for many families, but to the extent that they are able, it’s important that both of the student’s legal parents help pay for the [education] of their child,” Duncan said.

Despite questions about whether these changes would result in cost savings for same-sex households, LGBT groups like the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network praised the move to include same-sex households in FAFSA.

“GLSEN has long worked to ensure that sexual orientation and gender identity are not used to discriminate against students in our nation’s K-12 schools, whether that student identifies as LGBT, has LGBT friends, or comes from an LGBT family,” said GLSEN Director of Public Policy Shawn Gaylord. “We’re thrilled by the Department of Education’s decision to allow students filling out the FAFSA to accurately describe the makeup of their family, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”

Praise also came from the Family Equality Council, which shared credit for making the change as part of a group that included the Consortium of Higher Education LGBT Resource Professionals and the National Center for Transgender Equality

“Students seeking financial aid want to know that the federal government will recognize their families and not treat them differently based on their parents’ sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status,” said Emily Hecht-McGowan, the Family Equality Council’s director of public policy. “Federal forms that are inclusive of all families are important tools to help LGBT parents ensure their children receive the legal and financial protections they need and the opportunities in life that they deserve.”

According to the Department of Education, it will publish these changes this week in the Federal Register for public comment as part of the draft 2014-2015 FAFSA.

The changes come as the U.S. Supreme Court has litigation before it challenging the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Asked if the a ruling against DOMA would prompt further changes to FAFSA, Jane Glickman, a Department of Education spokesperson, replied, “We won’t know the answer to that until the Court has issued its decision and we have reviewed that decision.”

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