Politics
The path to winning marriage in 50 states in five years
One expert says HRC’s goal ‘completely unrealistic’
Following the Supreme Court rulings, advocates are making plans to achieve marriage equality throughout the country. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key).
Amid celebration over the Supreme Court rulings against the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8, plans are already in place to extend the victories further as the Human Rights Campaign has pledged to win marriage equality in all 50 states within five years.
Following the announcement of that goal, which was made by HRC President Chad Griffin on the steps of the Supreme Court immediately after the decisions, state advocates as well as other national groups are engaged in plans to bring marriage equality to the 37 states where gay couples are still unable to wed.
Speaking with the Washington Blade at the court after he made the pledge, Griffin said achieving that goal would involve a combination of several routes, including additional litigation.
“It will take legislative work, it will take ballot work, it will take Congress and it will ultimately take the federal courts again to bring full equality to every single corner of this country,” Griffin said. “But there is no ground we will leave unturned. Today we will fight aggressively on all fronts in all states.”
Griffin said he’s basing the timeline for his plan on the length of time it took to overturn Prop 8, which took five years from the time Prop 8 passed at the ballot in 2008.
There are already new lawsuits in the works in the wake of the rulings that struck down DOMA, the anti-gay law prohibiting federal recognition of same-sex marriage, and Prop 8. Although many hoped the latter case would be the one to bring marriage equality to all 50 states, the ruling instead that came down was limited in scope to California.
Jon Davidson, legal director of Lambda Legal, told the Blade his group is planning new lawsuits to advance marriage equality, but isn’t yet ready to talk details.
“We do have plans to file additional marriage cases in federal court, and are preparing those now,” Davidson said. “We are not in a position to share which states at the moment.”
Appearing on CNN on Sunday, David Boies, one half of the legal dream team hired by the American Foundation for Equal Rights that successfully led the lawsuit against Prop 8, said, “there isn’t any state we’re giving up on” and suggested new litigation is coming.
“Our goal is to have marriage equality that’s guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, enforced in every single state in the union,” Boies said.
But Davidson also cautioned gay couples against filing additional lawsuits because of the time and cost involved as well as whether the litigation is strategically appropriate.
“The Perry case, for example, cost each side several million dollars to litigate,” Davidson said. “Often, numerous expert witnesses are required. And, if brought in the wrong place, at the wrong time or without adequate preparation, suits can set back our community’s progress by creating bad precedent that could create barriers to equality nationwide.”
Some are skeptical about HRC’s timetable. Among them is Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, who said meeting that goal is “completely unrealistic.”
“I cannot imagine same-sex marriage passing in my lifetime (plus a couple decades or more) in many southern and border states, plus some of the Rocky Mountain and Midwest states,” Sabato said. “Any state with a decent-sized GOP majority in at least one state legislative house will be enough to kill the effort. Only a handful of states have the citizen-sponsored ballot initiative option.”
Sabato said another lawsuit akin to the 1967 case of Loving v. Virginia would be the best route to achieve nationwide marriage equality — but seeing that come to fruition in five years is doubtful.
“That is a completely unrealistic schedule, given the obstacles in the states,” Sabato said. “And I doubt the Supreme Court will take up another major marriage case that quickly.”
Meanwhile, several lawsuits are already pending that have the potential to not only extend marriage equality in certain states, but advance to the Supreme Court for an ultimate resolution extending same-sex marriage nationwide.
The most high-profile among them is the challenge to Nevada’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, Sevcik v. Sandova, which was filed by Lambda Legal and is pending before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. That case is on a parallel track with Jackson v. Abercombie, a challenge to Hawaii’s ban on same-sex marriage that was filed by private attorneys.
Judges placed a stay on the cases as the more advanced DOMA and Prop 8 cases were proceeding through the judiciary, but that stay is slated to expire on July 18.
Davidson had an ambitious outlook for the timeline for the Nevada case and said it’s teed up to potentially be the next to reach the Supreme Court.
“We will be filing our appellate brief with the Ninth Circuit in September,” Davidson said. “We expect to argue the case to that appellate court sometime in 2014 and possibly have that case in front of the Supreme Court in 2015.”
Also, as Buzzfeed reported, a U.S. district court in Michigan ruled on Monday to let a federal challenge to the state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage proceed in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision against DOMA. That challenge will be interesting to watch because the Sixth Circuit has a reputation for being a conservative court.
Eyes on legislation in Illinois, New Jersey
But the best prospects for advancing marriage equality remain in the legislative arena as advocates in two states — Illinois and New Jersey — work to muster enough votes to pass bills that would legalize gay nuptials.
In Illinois, supporters of same-sex marriage are hoping the extension of the legislative session to Aug. 31 will permit them enough time to build support after gay State Rep. Greg Harris didn’t bring the bill to a vote because he didn’t think the measure had enough support.
Bernard Cherkasov, CEO of Equality Illinois, told the Blade he’s hoping the extension of the House session will provide enough time for a successful vote on the bill sometime this fall.
“The bill has been granted an extension in the House through Aug. 31, with the possibility of further extensions, if needed,” Cherkasov said. “We hope that the bill will pass the full House vote during the ‘veto session’ which is scheduled to take place this fall.”
In New Jersey, lawmakers are working to build support to override Republican Gov. Chris Christie’s veto of marriage equality legislation in the wake of his comments calling the Supreme Court’s decision against DOMA “incredibly insulting” and “another example of judicial supremacy.”
Calling Christie’s remarks “insulting,” State Sen. Barbara Buono, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate challenging Christie in the upcoming election, told the Washington Blade on Friday she thinks the override is just a few votes short in the Senate.
“This governor has to release the Republicans in the Senate and the Assembly,” Buono said. “I think that we could easily get an override if he would release them. These are people who live in fear of retribution and retaliation of this governor. If the governor would release them, we would have an override easily in the Senate; all we need are three votes.”
But should the override be unsuccessful, Buono said she’ll make marriage equality in New Jersey a campaign issue and pledge to make a marriage equality bill the first one that she signs if elected.
In both Illinois and New Jersey, litigation is pending before state courts to advance marriage equality should legislative efforts fail. Another Lambda lawsuit, Darby v. Orr, is pending before the Circuit Court of Cook County. In New Jersey, Lambda is expected to file on Wednesday a motion for summary judgment in its state case, Garden State Equality v. Dow, which also includes a federal equal protection claim.
Yet another lawsuit in New Mexico state court pursuing marriage equality was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
The case, which is pending before Albuquerque’s district court, was filed after city officials in Santa Fe issued guidance saying the state already has marriage equality because the statute governing marriage in the state is gender neutral. In response, New Mexico Attorney General Gary King said the statute is “vulnerable to challenge.”
Oregon activists seek 2014 ballot initiative
Ballot initiatives are also expected to advance marriage equality in more states as the nation prepares for mid-term elections. The foremost among those is the planned ballot initiative in Oregon to win marriage equality in the state in 2014.
Peter Zuckerman, media manager for Basic Rights Oregon, said the official date to start the necessary 116,284 signatures to place the initiative on the ballot is happening later this month.
“On July 20 we launch the campaign to collect the 116,284 signatures, which is the next step to qualify for the ballot,” Zuckerman said. “If all goes as planned, Oregonians will vote for the freedom to marry in November 2014.”
If Oregon LGBT activists win at the ballot, their efforts would institute marriage equality by reversing a state constitutional amendment that Oregon voters approved in 2004.
Meanwhile, in Nevada, the state assembly in May approved an amendment that would undo the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. The process to ratify amendments in the state requires the measure to pass in two consecutive state legislatures and at the ballot during the next election.
To assist in repealing these bans and other barriers to marriage equality, the ACLU announced last week it hired Republican strategist Steve Schmidt, a supporter of marriage equality who signed the friend-of-the-court brief against Prop 8, and former GOProud executive director Jimmy LaSalvia as part of a nationwide campaign. The ACLU has pledged to spend $10 million through 2016 as part of this effort.
LaSalvia told the Blade many states are conservative leaning, which will require supporters of marriage equality to undertake an extra effort to work with conservatives to achieve success.
“Conservatives know that marriage is a good thing, and we should encourage, protect, and promote it for everyone including gay people,” LaSalvia said. “I am looking forward to working with the ACLU to make that case, state by state, to build consensus through the political process to legalize civil marriage for gay couples.”
Plans in other states are also underway to extend marriage equality in the wake of the Supreme Court decisions last week.
• Arizona — The new group Equal Marriage Arizona is seeking to collect 400,000 signatures to place an amendment on the 2014 ballot reversing the constitutional ban on same-sex marriage that voters put in place in 2008.
• Pennsylvania — Last week, gay State Rep. Brian Sims announced that he plans to introduce legislation that would institute marriage equality and has begun to seek additional co-sponsors for the measure. Passing the bill will be difficult because Republicans control the governor’s mansion and the Senate in Pennsylvania.
• Colorado — In the state where Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) recently signed into law a measure to legalize civil unions, efforts are underway to extend full marriage equality. Colorado House Speaker Mark Ferrandino, who’s gay, said statewide LGBT rights groups are building a coalition to repeal the ban on same-sex marriage and expecting a ballot initiative before the end of the decade.
• Ohio — National LGBT groups and local activists held a meeting last month to discuss bringing an initiative to the ballot to reverse the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. One group, Freedom Ohio, said the plan is to take the initiative to the ballot in 2014, although the groups insisted a firm date hasn’t yet been set.
The White House
White House counterterrorism strategy targets ‘anti-American, radically pro-transgender’ groups
Administration released document last week
The White House released the “United States Counterterrorism Strategy” last week, introducing enforcement priorities that include references to people with “extreme transgender ideologies.”
The document is the first executive branch counterterrorism strategy released since former President Joe Biden’s 2021 “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism,” which largely focused on threats tied to domestic extremism and the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. The Trump-Vance administration’s new strategy instead centers heavily on cartels, Islamist organizations, and what it describes as “violent left-wing extremists.”
The report identifies three primary categories of terror threats facing the U.S.: “Narcoterrorists and Transnational Gangs,” “Legacy Islamist Terrorists,” and “Violent Left-Wing Extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists.” The strategy repeatedly frames those groups as existential threats to the U.S. and outlines a more aggressive, militarized counterterrorism posture.
The introduction to the report closes with a warning from President Donald Trump referencing counterterrorism operations carried out during his second administration: “We will find you and we will kill you.”
In the section outlining the administration’s counterterrorism priorities, the document argues that federal intelligence, and law enforcement agencies under prior administrations focused on the wrong threats while overlooking violence committed by left-wing extremists. The strategy specifically references transgender ideology while discussing political violence.
“As real threats were ignored or underplayed, Americans have witnessed the politically motivated killings of Christians and conservatives committed by violent left-wing extremists, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk by a radical who espoused extreme transgender ideologies.”
Claims tying a trans person to Kirk’s killing have been disputed, however, and multiple news outlets later retracted or corrected early reports that identified the shooter as trans.
The report later expands on that argument, saying the administration will prioritize targeting “violent secular political groups” it describes as anti-American and “radically pro-transgender.”
“In addition to cartels and Islamist terror groups, our national CT activities will also prioritize the rapid identification and neutralization of violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist.”
The rhetoric mirrors claims frequently made by Trump allies and conservative commentators linking trans people and left-wing activism to political violence. However, data compiled by researchers and organizations tracking mass shootings does not support the idea that trans people are responsible for a significant share of such attacks.
Factcheck.org says rhetoric from Trump and several far-right political pundits contradicts available data, noting that the percentage of mass shootings committed by trans people is “exceedingly small.”
Despite the lack of evidence supporting generalized claims about trans people, the president’s son Donald Trump, Jr., told Fox News in September 2025 that he could not “name a mass shooting in the last year or two in America that wasn’t committed by, you know, a transgender lunatic.”
Factcheck.org also found that even if cases involving shooters with unclear gender identities were included in statistics about trans mass shooters, the number would still account for only a fraction of a percent.
Mark Bryant, founding executive director of the Gun Violence Archive, said the number of trans mass shooters could be as high as eight, but would still account for less than 0.1 percent of mass shootings over the last 12 years, according to GVA data. He added that the figure would remain below 0.2 percent even when examining incidents from 2018 to the present.
Beyond domestic extremism, the strategy frames the administration’s broader counterterrorism agenda through the lens of “America First” foreign policy and renewed U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere. The report repeatedly references the Monroe Doctrine, the nearly 200-year-old policy warning European powers against interference in the Americas.
“After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland” Trump said in the report.
The document also breaks down counterterrorism priorities by region, including the Middle East, where it argues the U.S. is “no longer as dependent” on the region because of increased domestic energy production.
“Our growing domestic energy production means the Middle East is no longer as central to America’s stability, yet threats from this region remain, and our counterterrorism goals continue to be specific and rooted in realistic threat analysis.”
The statement comes amid rising gas prices tied in part to instability surrounding the war involving Iran, with fuel costs reaching some of their highest levels since 2022. According to AAA, the national average price for gasoline climbed to $4.52 per gallon as the national average rose “$.25 for a second straight week.“
Congress
Bill seeks to block global gag rule expansion
Policy now bans US foreign aid to groups promoting ‘gender ideology’
Lawmakers on Wednesday introduced a bill that would block the expansion of the global gag rule.
President Ronald Reagan in 1985 implemented the global gag rule, also known as the “Mexico City” policy, which bans U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services.
Trump reinstated the rule during his first administration. The Biden-Harris administration shortly after it took office in 2021 rescinded it.
The Trump-Vance administration earlier this year expanded the global gag rule to ban U.S. foreign aid for groups that promote “gender ideology.” The expansion took effect on Feb. 26.
U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) introduced the Protecting Human Rights and Public Health in Foreign Assistance Act in the U.S. Senate. U.S. Reps. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), and Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) introduced it in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“Using taxpayer money to export the Trump administration’s anti-trans, anti-science, and anti-abortion ideological agenda isn’t just immoral — it’s antithetical to efficient, effective, and rights-based foreign assistance,” said Council for Global Equality Senior Policy Fellow Beirne Roose-Snyder on Wednesday in a press release.
Meng added the Trump-Vance administration’s “crusade against healthcare and global aid is putting millions of lives at risk worldwide.”
“No one will flourish under the new expanded global gag rule,” said the New York Democrat. “These policies weaponize foreign aid and will result in greater harm, particularly for women and girls, marginalized communities, and LGBTQI+ individuals.”
“They should never have been implemented at all, let alone without even a basic public comment process,” she added. “This legislation will reverse these dangerous policies.”
The White House
From red carpet to chaos: A first-person narrative of the WHCD shooting
The Blade’s WH correspondent Joe Reberkenny recounts his night at the WHCD after a shooter attempted to gain entry.
It started as any White House Correspondents’ Dinner is supposed to go—I assume. I’ve never been to one before this, but based on other events I’ve attended at the Hilton, including an HRC gala, it all seemed fairly normal.
There was a lot of traffic. Police had blocked off streets encompassing a large portion of Adams Morgan—particularly around the hotel. The president was making his first appearance after boycotting the event during his first term, so there was a sense of anticipation. It took me about 45 minutes to go just under a mile from my apartment to about three blocks from the hotel in my Uber. I waited until the last possible second before I felt like I was going to be late—6:30—to get out of the car, because it was raining and I was wearing my green tux.
I walked up to a group of people checking tickets at the base of the hotel. They seemed to just be glancing at the tiny, index-card-sized tickets rather than conducting any kind of full security screening outside. As I walked from that first checkpoint to the drive-around drop-off area, I joined what was essentially one long line for the red carpet. It eventually split into people who wanted photos and those who didn’t—but again, there was no real need to show anything beyond that small ticket upon entering, and even that wasn’t being checked closely.
A light went off in my head; I felt that, given the speed at which security was checking tickets, they couldn’t fully see the foil logo and tiny table numbers from that distance. I remember thinking that if I had a similarly sized piece of paper, I could have gotten through up to that point.
I also noticed there was no real security checkpoint or metal detectors upon initially entering the hotel grounds—unlike what I had seen at the HRC gala the year before.
I waited about 35 minutes in line in the car drop-off area—without cars, since it had been repurposed to corral press and their guests before entering the building and heading onto the red carpet. I took my photo, then went up the escalator to meet my date, Jacob Bernard from Democracy Forward. They wouldn’t let him onto the red carpet without his ticket, so I gave him his, which I had been holding. He was already inside the venue despite not having his ticket on him and had been at one of the pre-parties.
That also struck me as odd—that you could access a pre-dinner party without a ticket or going through any visible security.
After I found him, we took a photo together at a step-and-repeat past the main red carpet area around 7:45. Oddly enough, a group of my friends—gays who I regularly see on the dance floors of the gay bars of Washington, who work in various government and media-adjacent fields—found me, and we took pictures together. None were White House correspondents or held a “hard pass” to the White House (security credentials that allow entry into the White House complex).
Another light went off in my head that indicated party crashers probably shouldn’t be getting inside to an event that is supposed to be one of the most secure rooms in the country.
After the photos, I could see groups of people being moved from pre-party spaces in various meeting rooms on other floors and directed toward the main floor where the red carpet had been.
My guest and I went back up to the main floor and walked through a small security checkpoint that included only a handful of metal detectors. From there, I went down the stairs from the lobby into the International Ballroom, where we took our seats at Table 200. I talked to a few people I knew—very traditional pre-event chit-chat. The vibes felt good. It was my first time attending, and I was genuinely excited.
Around 8:15, the Marine Corps Band played and “Commandant’s Four” color guard presented the flags. We were then told to take our seats.
They introduced the head table—the president, first lady, vice president, and members of the White House Correspondents’ Association board. Weijia Jiang, senior White House correspondent for CBS News and president of the WHCA, gave a brief speech, essentially saying we would eat first and then move into the main program, which was supposed to feature mentalist Oz Pearlman.
At this point my table, 200 which included members of the Wall Street Journal, the Blade, and a European outlet all started eating. About 15 minutes later, Washington Hilton staff began clearing plates and preparing to bring out the next course.
As they cleared the plates, I heard four loud bangs.
I saw hotel employees immediately start ducking. They seemed to understand the gravity of the situation much faster than most attendees, including myself. At first, it sounded like a tray might have fallen over (but I later found out that wasn’t the case).
After about 30 seconds of watching some people duck, others look around in confusion, and some continue eating and drinking, I got down. I kneeled with my chair in front of me as a kind of barrier. Being at Table 200, I felt somewhat removed from where the actual incident occurred.
Then I saw the president being whisked away quickly by Secret Service, along with the first lady and others at the head table.
My reporter instincts kicked in. I grabbed my phone and started filming. I saw SWAT team members rush into the ballroom and onto the stage, clearing the area. I captured a video of people looking around, confused about what had just happened.
A few minutes later, the room was told by the WHCA president to hold on—that they would provide more information and guidance on what would happen next. There was some indication that they might try to continue the event despite what had occurred.
Everyone started frantically checking X to see if any major outlets were reporting. I was receiving texts from family, friends, and colleagues about the rapidly unfolding situation.
I walked to the bathroom—twice, technically. I couldn’t find it initially because it was hidden behind black curtains. (Later, those curtains were removed, and the men’s room was in clearer view.)
During the first walk to the bathroom, I called my editor to tell him what was happening. He instructed me to start sending copy to another editor, who would get it online. The ballroom had almost no service—it’s in the basement of a 12-story hotel—so it was a challenge. I utilized SMS fallback (since iMessage wasn’t working) to send updates.
I returned to the table, where people were still hovering—calling editors, scrolling, texting, sending photos and copy. I was already drafting my story and sending it in chunks, adding details as I gathered more information.
I walked my guest toward the bathroom again, which was on the opposite side of the ballroom from our table, so I had to cross what felt like a sea of journalists, PR officials, guests, and others on their phones, talking and scrolling. My guest pointed out that the press pool was being held in an alcove away from the ballroom doors and escalator exit—not in the ballroom with everyone else.
“Alive” by the Bee Gees was playing over the speakers in the bathroom, which felt a little too on the nose.
On my way out, I heard someone speaking over a microphone and rushed to the ballroom entrance. WHCA President Weijia Jiang was speaking. She announced that the event was over and the space was being evacuated.
She also said that President Trump would hold a press conference at the White House in about 25 minutes.
That’s when I knew it was a race against the clock.
I called my editor a second time to update him and asked if I should head to the briefing (knowing the answer would be yes). He confirmed.
Then the crowd began to move. People grabbed purses, bottles—some left belongings behind. Even though it was technically becoming a crime scene, no one was actively forcing us out. It felt more like a collective understanding: It was time to go.
I texted my guest: “OK, I have to go to the White House. I’m so sorry to leave you.”
I made my way with the sea of people toward the one exit we were allowed to use and zipped between women in fancy gowns and men looking like penguins.
I put on my hard press pass, opened the Capital Bikeshare app, reserved the closest e-bike, and headed out.
I walked up Columbia Road to 20th and Wyoming, grabbed the bike, and rode down Wyoming, then 18th, cut over to U Street, and went straight down 16th to the White House. That ride was exhilarating. I also filmed an Instagram Reel updating my followers on what was going on. I could see tourists and D.C. residents alike looking at me from their cars and the sidewalk, obviously confused as to why a man dressed in a tux had hopped on a bike.
I got off the bike where 16th Street meets Lafayette Square and darted toward the first White House security checkpoint, where they were verifying press credentials. Luckily, I had mine. After that, it turned into a mad dash. Everyone who made it through started moving quickly.
The sound of heels on what I think was cobblestone—or maybe brick—sticks with me. My own shoes were clacking as I ran toward the White House alongside other journalists in heels and dress shoes.
At the Secret Service checkpoint, there was a separate line for hard pass holders. Having my hard pass let me skip much of the impeccably dressed line of journalists who didn’t think to bring their hard pass with them.
It was probably the most exquisitely dressed press crowd I’ve ever seen—tuxedos, gowns, full makeup. It felt like something out of “The Hunger Games.”
I went through security, put my belongings through the metal detector, entered my code, grabbed my things, and ran to the briefing room.
Cuba marks IDAHOBiT amid heightened tensions with U.S.
PHOTOS: Blade Summer Kickoff Party
PHOTOS: Taste of Point
Honey, have we been priced out of gay paradise?
Comings & Goings
UK government makes trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban a legislative priority
Bureau of Prisons declines to reconsider transgender inmate policy
Yes, chef!
What’s new in Rehoboth Beach for summer 2026
LGBTQ community must say NO to Janeese Lewis George
-
United Kingdom4 days agoUK government makes trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban a legislative priority
-
Federal Government5 days ago
Bureau of Prisons declines to reconsider transgender inmate policy
-
a&e features5 days ago
Yes, chef!
-
Rehoboth Beach5 days ago
What’s new in Rehoboth Beach for summer 2026
