Opinions
Will Adams Morgan make Dupont’s mistake?
Advisory reps said poised to ask city to renew liquor license moratorium

Adams Morgan (Photo by Aude; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)
Residents of the District’s thriving MidCity neighborhoods thunderously objected last spring to a controversial proposal by a tiny “citizens group” to impose a liquor license moratorium throughout the area. They quashed the idea by turning out at community meetings and registering opposition on petitions. Some even flipped a shopworn slogan utilized by development objectors.
“We don’t want to become the next Adams Morgan” was suddenly bestowed a new meaning by residents in Logan Circle, Shaw and surrounding 14th and U streets. They demonstrated a desire for convenient new dining, drinking and dancing amenities also offering the best of urban living to guests and visitors alike.
Originally advanced by liquor license protest groups, the phrase had become the battle cry complaint by the organized and vocal few throughout the city suffering suburban cul-de-sac symptoms. It was the meme that symbolized efforts to prohibit and restrict new bars and restaurants. Referencing the destination commercial strips along both 18th Street and Columbia Road intersecting at the center of the Adams Morgan neighborhood in northwest Washington, it was a generic slur against vibrant entertainment zones in densely populated high-profile areas.
The MidCity debate altered those implications. Rather than a whine against progress, residents utilized the phrase to refer instead to toxic moratorium-renewal-time warfare common in the handful of areas with business prohibitions. They considered outdated moratoriums a failed experiment posing obstacles to economic vitality.
Moratorium areas were getting left behind. Who wanted that?
It appears that the advisory neighborhood group for the namesake Adams Morgan of epithetic nomenclature is again likely to refuse shedding its nay-saying notoriety. The odds are long that they will ask the city to terminate a 14-year alcohol-license ban when it expires next April, despite plethoric negative effects on community business development. In fact, a small civic association is demanding that new restrictions be added. It is expected that, at best, only modest revisions will be advanced for city agency consideration.
The unfortunate mistake that the Dupont Circle advisory neighborhood commission made last month is anticipated for repetition in Adams Morgan.
The Dupont group finally offered the city an opinion too late to allow for city agency review prior to moratorium expiration, following several pretentiously titled “listening sessions” that nearly no one attended. Due this recurrent failure, the ban will need to be again temporarily extended until the D.C. Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board can render a disposition decision.
The Dupont Circle advisory group is requesting that the ABC Board renew the 23-year-old “East Dupont” moratorium, voting to ask the city to continue the ban on bars while permitting new restaurants. The irony is that the current moratorium has allowed for two new restaurant licenses since 2010 – for which there have been no takers. The affected 17th Street, N.W., commercial strip has been rendered undesirable after more than two decades of enterprise suppression. A former commissioner called the group’s decision “insane.”
Also controversial was the manner by which the group determined their recommendation. According to Roberts Rules of Order, the 4-4 split vote should have resulted in defeat of the moratorium renewal resolution. However, an unusual provision hidden in the group’s bylaws grants the chairman’s vote extra weight in a tie, allowing the measure to pass. Henry Martyn Robert, author of the parliamentary standards bearing his name, resided in Dupont Circle in the late 19th century. Pity Mr. Robert, now spinning in his grave.
MidCity residents could only scoff at all this folly, witnessing the everyday eastward exodus of Dupont denizens toward an astounding array of retail and hospitality offerings on the business blocks of the adjacent moratorium-free areas.
The ABC Board is expected to soon announce rejection of the MidCity moratorium proposal. They should also terminate both the Dupont Circle and Adams Morgan bans and put an end to marketplace misery.
The two neighborhood advisory groups are apparently not up to the task of asking.
Mark Lee is a long-time entrepreneur and community business advocate. Follow on Twitter: @MarkLeeDC. Reach him at [email protected].
Opinions
Trump declares war on universal human rights
Conservatives in Africa have applauded anti-LGBTQ US policies

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations, protects and promotes the inclusion of vulnerable and marginalized groups by recognizing that all people are born free and equal. It guarantees rights without discrimination based on, but not limited to, sex, gender, or any other social status. It was adopted by states at a global level immediately after the horrors of World War II, to ensure such atrocities and the events that led up to it do not occur again. The UDHR ensures everyone’s right to live safe, free from discrimination, hate and violence and to be treated with dignity under the law.
The United States, indicating that it would be withdrawing from the UN, puts a question mark on human rights protection. The continuous protection and priority of democratic and constitutional human rights is under threat. As we have witnessed, the US is one of the largest contributors to the UN’s budget, and its withdrawal places global human rights protections in question, especially with regard to access to health services. Will this move give power and rise to human rights violations? What will be the long-term impact on grassroots community movements? Are vulnerable and marginalized groups safe?
Over the past few weeks, the world has witnessed a disturbing shift in leadership, one that not only rolls back protections for everyone, including vulnerable and marginalized groups, but also has the potential to fuel hate, spread misinformation, disinformation, division, and violence. Donald Trump’s return to power has been marked by an alarming series of executive orders targeting immigrants, migrants, LGBTIQ+ people and women all under the guise of “realigning American values.”
Erasing identities
Trump’s position on gender diversity has found eager supporters, including many in Africa who advocate for a rigid, binary definition of gender. His Jan. 20, 2025, executive order, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology and Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” was nothing short of an attack on transgender people and all persons who choose to live in a manner where they are not defined and boxed in by their attributed gender. This order spreads disinformation by claiming that gender identity is false and deceitful, legitimizing hate speech. By insinuating that gender diversity is a threat it creates an environment where transphobia will likely thrive without any consequences. With one stroke of the pen, Trump reinforced conservative, exclusionary gender norms and gave legitimacy to those who seek to erase transgender identities.
The consequences of this executive order are slowly being felt far beyond the US.
In Nigeria, conservative leaders have hailed Trump’s decision as validation of their own laws, which according to reports, already criminalize same-sex sexual activity between men and between women, and gender expression for transgender persons. A 2024 report by Nigerian advocacy group, the Initiative for Equal Rights, highlighted that LGBTIQ+ people already face regular discrimination and violence. These executive orders are likely to result in a rise of hate crimes towards gender-diverse persons. Framing gender identity as a “dangerous ideology,” Trump is not only spreading disinformation but also legitimizing hate speech and possibly creating a global ripple effect that threatens the safety and dignity of transgender and gender-diverse people.
Xenophobia in full swing
Transgender people are not the only ones under attack. Immigrants and migrants are also targeted as Trump endlessly signed his executive orders. One of his over 80 executive orders is the realigning of the US refugee admissions program, which frames migrants and refugees as threats to national security, thereby potentially reinforcing dangerous xenophobic rhetoric. Trump has long pushed the false narrative that migrants are a burden on resources, a danger to public safety, and a threat to the so-called “true American identity.” This rhetoric does more than just close borders. It dehumanizes refugees, fuels violence against migrants, which directly goes against the essence of the human rights protection mechanisms such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, which protects the rights and dignity of migrants.
Misogyny over human rights, right?
Trump’s disregard for women’s rights is nothing new.
A 2018 article in the Guardian reported how Donald Trump’s attitudes and policies have undermined women’s rights through derogatory remarks, sexual misconduct allegations, and policy rollbacks. The reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, and its cuts in funding for health services, is likely to disrupt essential sexual and reproductive health services of many women around the world. It will leave women who are already on the margins of exclusion, further exposed to human rights violations such forced pregnancies due to denial of safe abortion and contraceptive services.
An Afrobarometer report from December 2023 revealed that gender-based violence remains a top concern in Africa, with 14 percent of respondents stating that violence against women and girls is “very common” in their communities. Trump’s policies and rhetoric only serve to exacerbate these realities, reinforcing harmful stereotypes, restricting bodily autonomy, and undermining decades of progress in advancing women’s rights. The leader of the free world’s rhetoric and actions reinforces systems that discriminate against women and disregards the protection of all women.
Bradley Fortuin is a consultant at the Southern Africa Litigation Center and a social justice activist. This article was first published in Modern Ghana and Botswana Gazette.
Opinions
This is fascism, not child protection
Hungarian government is trying to ban public Budapest Pride march

Pride is not just a protest. Pride is a movement.
The Hungarian government is trying to restrict peaceful protests with a critical voice by targeting a minority. Therefore, as a movement, we will fight for the freedom of all Hungarians to protest!
Hungarians are a freedom-loving nation. We know that if the government tries to ban protests with critical voices, they will face resistance from the whole of society. That is why we need a scapegoat, a distraction, another wave of hatred. A little bedbuging. They lie to their voters about a child protection measure, but there is no child protection in this bill.
Just two days after the anniversary of the Hungarian revolution and war of independence of 1848, many people were outraged by the hypocrisy of the government’s attempt to strip us of our hard-won freedoms. The slogan of the 1848 revolution against the Austrian Empire was “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” defying oppression and censorship. When Pride organizers and participants stand up for their own freedoms, they are standing up for the rights of all Hungarians. It is a new level of fascism when only those who support those in power are allowed to march in the streets of a country.
If the government tries to restrict the right of citizens to demonstrate peacefully by means of made-up rules, it will be that any demonstration can be banned for any fictitious reason. We will not allow future generations to grow up in such a country. We are at home, we will be here, and we will work to make Hungary a freer country.
The LGBTQ community has been a target of attacks from the ruling parties for years. If attempts are made to ban demonstrations for the rights of the LGBTQ community, there is no guarantee that peaceful demonstrations by groups that the governing parties call the enemy, “the bedbugs,” will not be banned, on the false grounds of child protection.
As members of the LGBTQ community, it is part of our lives from childhood that we have to defend ourselves, that we have to fight for acceptance and equal rights. Even though those in power try to dehumanize us, we LGBTQ people are all human beings who want freedom, safety and equal rights. The pride march is one of the most visible parts of this struggle, but equally as important is the resistance we wage every day to lead a free, authentic and happy life in our own country.
It would never occur to a democratic leader to restrict the fundamental rights of those who disagree with them. Elected representatives should not work for their own self-interest, but for all citizens.
We are asking Viktor Orbán’s government: How will they guarantee that all Hungarian citizens, including LGBTQ people, can live and protest freely? If they cannot guarantee this, it is an admission of their own incompetence.
Opinions
Alan Simpson: Republican from another country
93-year-old conservative rode with us when no one else would

The senator from Wyoming was authenticity itself — a Western force coming at you like a bobcat with a crooked smile. Indeed, the name of his ranch outside of Cody is the “Bobcat.” It was at the Bobcat near Yellowstone Park, where my friend Sen. Alan K. Simpson (1931-2025) did some of his best thinking about history, politics, and how people live and fight.
When he came to Washington, Al Simpson was steeped in this uniquely Western Bobcat Ranch heritage — from his grandfather, who represented W.F. “Buffalo Bill” Cody and prosecuted Butch Cassidy to his mother, a founder of the Buffalo Bill Historical Center that today displays paintings by Thomas Moran and Annie Oakley’s rifles. He was an old-school live-and-let-live conservative Republican, but one with a Western twist — one part sneer, one part laugh-out-loud funny. It was that twist, I believe, that made him unique.
Sen. Simpson stood with his friend Congressman Barney Frank in 1998 on the Capitol steps at the candlelight vigil after the murder of Matthew Shepard in Laramie. Shaken by the barbarity of what happened, Simpson denounced Shepard’s killing as an “ugly, ugly butchering. The people of my state and the University of Wyoming want you to know this is not who we are.” Then came a wave of boos and the heckling of Al as a Republican from Wyoming. He told me he never forgot that booing and resolved to continue fighting with us for our equality in the years to come. On this, he was good to his word.
A Houston gay community effort challenged and appealed the sodomy charge of John Lawrence and Tyron Garner in Texas. We believed our organization, a gay-straight alliance, the Republican Unity Coalition (RUC) had a role to play. Alan Simpson stepped forward to serve as our chairman, signing our amicus brief in support of Lawrence and Garner to strike down the Texas sodomy law. He then reached out to his friend “Jerry Ford” (former President Gerald Ford) to join our effort. Ford did so becoming the first and only president to join an LGBTQ advocacy group. In 2003, on the day the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the Lawrence case, Al wrote in an op-ed published by the Wall Street Journal, “Homosexuality should be a non-issue for the GOP… sodomy laws are contrary to American values protecting personal liberty and opposing discrimination.” Al was thrilled when the Court voted 6-3 in favor of Lawrence ending the criminalization of homosexuality.
When Al came out in support of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, the Rev. Fred Phelps (“God Hates Fags”) denounced Al as a “senile old fag lover.” Al responded with grace and hilarity in the style of one of his heroes, cowboy humorist Will Rogers. “Dear Rev. Phelps, I just want to alert you to the fact that some dizzy son of a bitch is sending out mailings and emails using your name! I know you are a god fearing, Christian person filled to the brim with forbearance, tolerance and love…and this other goofy homophobe nut must be something opposite.” Al did not pull back from his support for same-sex marriage. He opposed President George W. Bush on his proposal to amend the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Al wrote in the Washington Post, “Several Senate members want to create more anguish by pushing a proposal to amend the Constitution … but a federal marriage amendment would do nothing to strengthen families, just the opposite.”
For the rest of his long life, Al remained supportive of the LGBTQ community and our families. We disbanded the old Republican Unity Coalition, a delusion we once shared to make “homosexuality a non-issue for the Republican Party.” There are no more Alan Simpson Republicans. They are from another country. I happily left the party and married my “pard” as they call partners in Cody. We were married with a reception in Washington, made all the brighter with Al’s attendance and his wife Ann’s blessings. Later, they gave our son his first stuffie.
Alan Simpson’s many obituaries and tributes briefly mention his support of “gay rights” without elaboration. We should all pause to reflect on just how far this 93-year-old Republican rode with us when no one else would.
Charles Francis, president of the Mattachine Society of Washington, D.C., served for 10 years as a Trustee of the Buffalo Bill Center of the West in Cody, Wyo.
-
District of Columbia15 hours ago
Harvey Fierstein says he was banned from Kennedy Center
-
District of Columbia3 days ago
Suspect pleads guilty to drug sale that led to deaths of two D.C. gay men
-
World3 days ago
Advocacy group calls for WorldPride boycott
-
Books5 days ago
Bookstores full of LGBTQ-themed new releases