News
HISTORIC: Supreme Court strikes down DOMA, Prop 8
DOMA violates equal protection; Prop 8 supporters lack standing
Gay marriage advocates rallying at the Supreme Court earlier this year during oral arguments for two major cases. The court struck down two anti-gay laws today, opening the door for expanded rights for same-sex couples in many jurisdictions. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
In a historic development, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two decisions on Wednesday that advanced marriage rights for gay couples and will almost certainly reshape the national debate on the issue.
In one 5-4 ruling, the court determined that the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional because it violates due process and equal protection for same-sex couples under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That decision means the U.S. government must begin recognizing same-sex marriages for a broad range of benefits, including those related to federal taxes and immigration law.
Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the opinion and was joined by Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
“The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity,” Kennedy said. “By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment.”
The dissenting justices were Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. In his opinion, Roberts says Congress acted constitutionally in passing DOMA and took issue with the authority the court granted itself in overturning the anti-gay statute.
Writing his dissent, Scalia said the decision of the court robs the American public of its ability to decide the issue of same-sex marriage through the democratic process.
“Some will rejoice in today’s decision, and some will despair at it; that is the nature of a controversy that matters so much to so many,” Scalia writes. “But the Court has cheated both sides, robbing the winners of an honest victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. We owed both of them better.”
In another 5-4 decision, the court determined anti-gay forces don’t have standing to defend California’s Proposition 8. That decision leaves in place a district court injunction that prohibits the state of California from enforcing its ban on same-sex marriage. Gay couples will be able to marry in the state once the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals lift its stay.
Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the court and was joined by Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer and Kagan. Kennedy wrote the dissenting opinion and was joined by Thomas, Alito and Sotomayor.
“The Article III requirement that a party invoking the jurisdiction of a federal court seek relief for a personal, particularized injury serves vital interests going to the role of the Judiciary in our system of separated powers,” Roberts writes. “States cannot alter that role simply by issuing to private parties who otherwise lack standing a ticket to the federal courthouse.”
The court’s ruling in the case against Prop 8, known as Hollingsworth v. Perry, is specific only to California — meaning the justices didn’t grant the expansive ruling that supporters of marriage equality had sought to bring marriage equality to all 50 states.
Shortly after HRC President Chad Griffin walked out of the court with plaintiffs in the marriage cases, he received a call from President Obama who was aboard Air Force One. Obama congratulated Griffin for the victories as reporters and onlookers watched.
The decisions were handed down 10 years to the day that the Supreme Court announced its landmark decision in the 2003 case of Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down state sodomy laws throughout the country.
The challenge to DOMA, known as United States v. Windsor, was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and others in 2011 on behalf of lesbian New York widow Edith Windsor. Upon the death of her spouse Thea Spyer in 2009, Windsor had to pay the U.S. government $363,000 in estate taxes because of DOMA — a penalty that she wouldn’t have faced if she were married to a man.
The decision striking down DOMA affirms the initial rulings against the federal anti-gay law last year by U.S. District Judge Barbara Jones and the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Obama administration helped in securing the ruling against DOMA. After it stopped defending DOMA in 2011, the U.S. Justice Department began filing briefs against the law and sent attorneys to litigate against it during oral arguments. U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued against DOMA before the Supreme Court, saying the law doesn’t hold up under the standard heightened scrutiny, or a greater assumption it’s unconstitutional.
But the Supreme Court didn’t get to the issue of heightened scrutiny in the DOMA case because it found the law was unconstitutional under the less stringent standard of rational basis review.
The case against Prop 8 was filed by the California-based American Foundation for Equal Rights in 2009 on behalf of two plaintiff couples — a lesbian couple, Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier, and a gay male couple, Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo — who were unable to marry because of the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.
The attorneys representing them were Theodore Olson, a former U.S. solicitor general during the Bush administration, and David Boies, a so-called “dream team” of attorneys who represented opposite sides in the 2000 case Bush v. Gore.
Because the state officials — California Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris — refused to defend Prop 8 in court, anti-gay groups that put Prop 8 on the ballot in 2008 such as ProtectMarriage.com took up the responsibility of defending the measure. The California Supreme Court certified the groups had standing under state law and the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed they had standing.
But the high court determined that these groups — even though attorney Charles Cooper spoke on behalf on them in oral arguments — don’t have standing because they lack any legal injury in the wake of the lower court’s determination that Prop 8 is unconstitutional.
The Obama administration had also assisted in efforts to secure a ruling against California’s Proposition 8. The Justice Department filed a friend-of-the-court brief in February saying the ban was unconstitutional and Verrilli argued in court against Prop 8, suggesting all eight states with domestic partnerships should be required to grant marriage rights to gay couples.
The issue of standing also came up in the DOMA case for two reasons. One, the court had questioned whether the U.S. Justice Department could have appealed the district court ruling to the Second Circuit because the initial ruling against DOMA was what the Obama administration wanted. Two, the court questioned whether the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, a five-member Republican-majority panel within the U.S. House, had standing to take up defense of DOMA in the administration’s stead.
But the court determined an active controversy remains in the case because the U.S. government still hasn’t refunded Windsor the $363,000 she paid in estate taxes. Once the court determined it has jurisdiction based on the Obama administration’s appeal of the lawsuit, it didn’t get to the issue of whether BLAG has standing.
In his ruling, Kennedy writes the continuation of litigation in the absence of a federal ruling on DOMA would cause uncertainty.
“[T]he costs, uncertainties, and alleged harm and injuries likely would continue for a time measured in years before the issue is resolved,” Kennedy writes in the ruling. “In these unusual and urgent circumstances, the very term ‘prudential’ counsels that it is a proper exercise of the Court’s responsibility to take jurisdiction.”
Texas state Rep. James Talarico won a hard-fought primary Tuesday to become the state’s Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, defeating U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett in one of the year’s most closely watched and competitive Democratic contests.
Talarico, a Presbyterian seminarian and three-term lawmaker from Round Rock, was declared the winner by the Associated Press early Wednesday morning after a closely tracked vote count that drew national attention.
“Tonight, the people of our state gave this country a little bit of hope,” Talarico told the AP. “And a little bit of hope is a dangerous thing.”
With 52.8% of the vote to Crockett’s 45.9%, Talarico secured the nomination outright, avoiding a runoff and capping months of sharp contrasts between the two candidates over strategy, messaging, and how best to compete statewide in Texas. Democrats hope the competitive primary — and the relatively narrow margin — signals growing momentum in a state that has not elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate since 1988.
Talarico has long expressed support for the LGBTQ community, a position he highlights prominently on his campaign website. Under the “Issues” section, he directly addresses assumptions that might arise from his faith and background as a seminarian in a deeply conservative state.
“My faith in Jesus leads me to reject Christian Nationalism and commit myself to the project of democracy,” his website reads. “Because that’s the promise of America: a democracy where every person and every family — regardless of religion, race, gender, sexual orientation, or any other difference between us — can truly be free and live up to their full potential.”
Crockett struck a conciliatory tone following her defeat, emphasizing party unity ahead of November.
“This morning I called James and congratulated him on becoming the Senate nominee,” Crockett told Politico. “Texas is primed to turn blue and we must remain united because this is bigger than any one person. This is about the future of all 30 million Texans and getting America back on track.”
Talarico also drew national attention earlier in the race when “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert said he was initially unable to air an interview with the state legislator due to potential FCC concerns involving CBS. The episode sparked a broader political debate.
Brendan Carr, chair of the Federal Communications Commission, appointed by President Donald Trump, told reporters the controversy was a “hoax,” though he also acknowledged Talarico’s ability to harness the moment to build support as an underdog candidate. The interview was later released online and garnered millions of views, boosting Talarico’s national profile.
In November, Talarico will face the winner of the Republican primary between incumbent Sen. John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who have been locked in a bruising GOP contest. Rep. Wesley Hunt was also in the Republican primary field. The GOP race is expected to head to a May runoff.
In a joint statement, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Kirsten Gillibrand praised Talarico’s victory and framed him as a candidate capable of broad appeal.
“As an eighth-generation Texan, former middle school teacher, and Presbyterian seminarian, James will be a fighter for Texans from all walks of life and of all political stripes,” they said. “In November, Texans will elect a champion for working people: James Talarico.”
Maryland
Md. Commission on LGBTQIA+ Affairs released updated student recommendations
LGBTQ students report higher rates of bullying, suicide
The Maryland Commission on LGBTQIA+ Affairs has released updated recommendations on how the state’s schools can support LGBTQ students.
The updated 16-page document outlines eight “actionable recommendations” for Maryland schools, supplemented with data and links to additional resources. The recommendations are:
- Developing and passing a uniform statewide and comprehensive policy aimed at protecting “transgender, nonbinary, and gender expansive students” against discrimination. The recommendation lists minimum requirements for the policy to address: name, pronoun usage, and restroom access.
- Requiring all educators to receive training about the specific needs of LGBTQ students, by trained facilitators. The training’s “core competencies” include instruction on terminology, data, and support for students.
- Implementing LGBTQ-inclusive curricula and preventing book bans. The report highlights a “comprehensive sexual education curriculum” as specifically important in the overall education curriculum. It also states the curriculum will “provide all students with life-saving information about how to protect themselves and others in sexual and romantic situations.”
- Establishing Gender Sexuality Alliances “at all schools and in all grade levels.” This recommendation includes measures on how to adequately establish effective GSAs, such as campaign advertising, and official state resources that outline how to establish and maintain a GSA.
- Providing resources to students’ family members and supporters. This recommendation proposes partnering with local education agencies to provide “culturally responsive, LGBTQIA+ affirming family engagement initiatives.”
- Collecting statewide data on LGBTQ youth. The data on Maryland’s LGBTQ youth population is sparse and non-exhaustive, and this recommendation seeks to collect information to inform policy and programming across the state for LGBTQ youth.
- Hiring a full-time team at the Maryland Department of Education that focuses on LGBTQ student achievement. These employees would have specific duties that include “advising on local and state, and federal policy” as well as developing the LGBTQ curriculum, and organizing the data and family resources.
- Promoting and ensuring awareness of the 2024 guidelines to support LGBTQ students.
The commission has 21 members, with elections every year, and open volunteer positions. It was created in 2021 and amended in 2023 to add more members.
The Governor’s Office of Communication says the commission’s goal is “to serve LGBTQIA+ Marylanders by galvanizing community voices, researching and addressing challenges, and advocating for policies to advance equity and inclusion.”
The commission is tasked with coming up with yearly recommendations. This year’s aim “to ensure that every child can learn in a safe, inclusive, and supportive environment.”
The Human Rights Campaign’s most recent report on LGBTQ youth revealed that 46.1 percent of LGBTQ youth felt unsafe in some school settings. Those numbers are higher for transgender students, with 54.9 percent of them saying they feel unsafe in school.
Maryland’s High School Youth Risk Behavior Survey reveals a disparity in mental health issues and concerns among students who identify as LGBTQ, compared to those who are heterosexual. LGBTQ students report higher rates of bullying, feelings of hopelessness, and suicidal thoughts. Nearly 36 percent of LGBTQ students report they have a suicide plan, and 26.7 percent of respondents say they have attempted to die by suicide.
The commission’s recommendations seek to combat the mental health crisis among the state’s LGBTQ students. They are also a call for local and state governments to work towards implementing them.
Virginia
Va. lawmakers consider partial restoration of Ryan White funds
State Department of Health in 2025 cut $20 million from Part B program
The Virginia General Assembly is considering the partial restoration of HIV funding that the state’s Department of Health cut last year.
The Department of Health in 2025 cut $20 million — or 67 percent of total funding — from the Ryan White Part B program.
The funding cuts started with the Trump-Vance administration passing budget cuts to federal HIV screening and protection programs. Rebate issues between the Virginia Department of Health and the company that provides HIV medications began.
Advocates say the funding cuts have disproportionately impacted lower-income people.
The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, a federal program started in 1990, provides medical services, public education, and essential services. Part B offers 21 services, seven of which remained funded after the budget cuts.
Equality Virginia notes “in 2025, a 67 percent reduction severely destabilized HIV services across the commonwealth.”
Virginia lawmakers have approved two bills — House Bill 30 and Senate Bill 30 — that would partially restore the funding. The Ryan White cuts remain a concern among community members.
Both chambers of the General Assembly must review their proposed changes before lawmakers can adopt the bills.
“While these amendments aren’t a full restoration of what community-based organizations lost, this marks a critical step toward stabilizing care for thousands of Virginians living with HIV,” said Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman. “Equality Virginia plans to continue their contact with lawmakers and delegates through the conference and up until the passing of the budget.”
“We appreciate lawmakers from both sides of the aisle who recognized the urgency of this moment and will work to ensure funding remains in the final version signed by the governor,” added Rahaman.
An undeclared war of distraction by the felon
Talarico beats Crockett in Texas primary
35 years after ‘Truth or Dare,’ Slam is still dancing
Md. Commission on LGBTQIA+ Affairs released updated student recommendations
