Politics
Why is Rubio blocking a gay black judicial nominee?
Fla. senator continues 10-month delay on official he once supported
Sen. Marco Rubio is holding up the nomination of a judicial nominee who’d be the first openly gay black male to serve on the federal bench. (Blade file photo by Michael Key).
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is being criticized for his continued hold on a gay black judicial nominee pending before the Senate as observers of the confirmation process dismiss his reasons for blocking the confirmation.
Rubio has been withholding the “blue slip” for William Thomas, whom President Obama first nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida nearly a year ago. If confirmed, Thomas would be the first openly gay black male to serve on the federal bench.
The Washington Blade reported in July that Rubio was blocking the nomination of Thomas along with Brian Davis, another black judicial nominee who was nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. But after Rubio last week lifted his hold on Davis, the continued obstruction of Thomas gained significant attention after The New York Times reported on the story.
Refusing to turn in the “blue slip” for a nomination — a responsibility for the U.S. senators representing the state where a judicial nominee would serve — effectively blocks the Senate Judiciary Committee from advancing the nomination. Opposing the Thomas nomination is a new position for Rubio, who initially recommended Thomas for the seat following the nominee’s approval by Florida’s Federal Judicial Nominating Commission.
In a statement to the Blade, Brooke Sammon, a Rubio spokesperson, confirmed Rubio opposes the Thomas nomination.
“The nomination of Judge Thomas has also been thoroughly reviewed, and Sen. Rubio has determined that Thomas’s record on the state court raises serious concerns about his fitness for a lifetime federal appointment,” she said. “After reviewing Thomas’s record, Senator Rubio cannot support moving forward with the nomination at this time.
The senator’s office provided a long list of reported actions by Thomas in his role as a state judge in the Miami-Dade Circuit. They involve two cases over which Thomas presided.
One is the case of Michael Traverso, who killed a cyclist in a hit-and-run accident while driving on a suspended license. Rubio’s office cites concerns that Thomas sentenced Traverso to the minimum sentence of 22.8 months in jail, less time served, amounting to only 364 days.
The other involves Joel Lebron, who took part in the 2002 gang rape and murder of 18-year-old Ana Maria Angel. According to Rubio’s office, Thomas twice suppressed confessions of perpetrators of the crime including the confession of Lebron, who pulled the trigger.
Another objection cited by Rubio’s office: Thomas broke down in tears in January while sentencing Lebron to death. His office cites a Miami Herald report, but that article says Thomas wept not for Lebron, but the victim as he was reading the circumstances of the murder.
In both of these rulings, Rubio’s office says an appellate court overturned Judge Thomas in whole or in part. Additionally, Rubio’s office contends a death sentence imposed on another defendant was also reversed because Thomas “improperly” allowed certain testimony.
Rubio has supported gay judicial nominees before. Just this week, Rubio was among the 98 senators who unanimously confirmed Todd Hughes as a U.S. Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
The reasons that Rubio’s office offered for blocking the nomination are in dispute. As reported by the Blade in July, Nushin Sayfie, administrative judge for the criminal division of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in Florida, has attempted to allay concerns about the Traverso case.
In a July 19 letter to Rubio, Sayfie writes the sentence Thomas gave in the case was within his guideline range and, unlike what the media reported, the defendant wasn’t charged with the death of the victim, but “charged with leaving the scene of an accident (involving death).”
A similar letter to Rubio asserting that Thomas acted responsibly in the case was written in January by the prosecutor in the case, Jane Anderson.
The Alliance of Justice, which tracks judicial nominations, has also raised points countering Rubio’s objection to the handling of the Lebron case.
Michelle Schwartz, director of justice programs for the Alliance for Justice, said the details of those proceedings were well-known before the Thomas nomination was made.
“The decision in the Lebron case to which Rubio now claims to object occurred six years ago (and Thomas sentenced one of the defendants to death),” Schwartz said. “Remember, Rubio first said he would support Thomas, then changed his mind. If a six-year-old decision was the issue, why did Rubio ever claim to support Thomas in the first place?”
LGBT advocates are also criticizing Rubio for his continued obstruction of the Thomas nomination and say it’s for reasons other than what his office has disclosed.
Nadine Smith, executive director of the statewide LGBT group Equality Florida, accused Rubio in a statement on Wednesday of pandering to Tea Party extremists by sabotaging the nomination of a gay, black judicial nominee.
“Once again, we see Senator Rubio playing politics when it comes to what’s best for Florida,” Smith said. “He is keeping a qualified nominee from the bench to appease extremists.”
John Aravosis, editor of AMERICAblog, accuses Rubio in a blog posting of blocking Thomas over the judicial nominee’s sexual orientation.
“I’m always intrigued when men who come off, to me at least, as rather queer act out against gay people,” Aravosis writes. “It makes me wonder if they’re projecting – or less subtly, using their public homophobia as some kind of private beard to convince their followers (and themselves?) that they’re not really closet cases.”
For its part, the White House is publicly expressing no consideration of withdrawing the nominee.
Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, repeated what he told the Blade in July when asked if Obama was rethinking the Thomas nomination.
“President Obama nominated Judge William Thomas more than 10 months ago,” Inouye said. “This judicial vacancy has been declared a ‘judicial emergency,’ and the non-partisan American Bar Association has rated Judge Thomas ‘well-qualified.’ Unfortunately, his nomination continues to be stalled, and the Senate should promptly consider it without further delay.”
The White House
HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage
Lawsuit filed Monday challenges White House effort to restrict care
The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nonprofit sister organization to the largest LGBTQ human rights lobbying and advocacy organization in the U.S., along with law firms Correia & Puth and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, filed a class action lawsuit against the government as it attempts to restrict gender-affirming healthcare for federal employees.
The suit, filed on Monday, alleges that the Office of Personnel Management, run by Trump appointee Scott Kupor, is discriminating against LGBTQ federal employees (and their families and retired employees) by prohibiting health insurance coverage for gender-affirming care under the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits plans. There are five plaintiffs named in the complaint, but it extends to others who have those healthcare plans.
The document asserts that OPM’s prohibition on coverage for “gender transition” care in the FEHB and PSHB programs violates Title VII, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, or national origin.
The policy, which was implemented on Jan. 1 following the 2025 issuing of Program Carrier Letter, mandated that insurance providers in these programs deny any coverage for gender-affirming care. In February, HRC filed a federal complaint with OPM over the change in healthcare policy, which was ultimately passed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for review. That complaint is now an officially filed class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Research from the Williams Institute at UCLA Law, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, indicates that this policy denying gender-affirming care will impact healthcare access for at least 39,400 current and former federal employees and their dependents.
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released a statement following the lawsuit’s filing.
“Our message to the Trump administration is simple: we’ll see you in court,” said Robinson. “Healthcare access should never be weaponized to advance discrimination — and the denial of coverage for critical healthcare based simply on who you are blatantly violates the rights of all of us.”
Gender-affirming care has been under constant attack by the Trump-Vance administration since its return to the White House, despite the practice being considered as extensively evidence-based but also supported by nearly every major medical organization. This type of care is provided to all people—not just transgender people—and includes things such as social affirmation, including using correct names and pronouns and wearing clothing that matches a person’s gender identity; mental health support, such as counseling to reduce depression and anxiety; and, in some cases, medical interventions such as reversible puberty blockers or hormone therapy when deemed medically appropriate.
“Federal employees have been through the wringer with the Trump administration,” said Cathy Harris, partner at Correia & Puth. “We draw the line at blatant discrimination to deny healthcare to our nation’s dedicated civil servants.”
“This odious policy is the latest example of the Trump administration’s obsession with targeting transgender people, using shameful and cruel tactics to threaten their employment, their health, and the well-being of themselves and their families,” Robinson added. “OPM’s actions will not go unchallenged, and we’ll continue to fight so that federal employees and their families receive the dignity they deserve.”
This is not the first time the White House has directly attacked gender-affirming care.
In January 2025, the administration issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.
For more information on how to get involved with the lawsuit, visit hrc.org.
Politics
Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028
Former Transportation Secretary was in Biden-Harris administration’s Cabinet
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told a podcaster he is considering throwing his hat in the ring for president once again.
“I don’t know,” Buttigieg told Steven Bartlett, the British host of The Diary of a CEO, the most popular top business and tech podcast on Spotify, which aired Monday. “I think I’m more inclined than not, but there’s so much we don’t know.”
“There’s so much I don’t even know about what’s going to happen this year, let alone … what we need to know later,” he added.
Buttigieg is no stranger to running for the Oval Office.
In 2019, the former South Bend, Ind., mayor was a serious contender in the Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential election but ultimately ended his campaign and endorsed Joe Biden.
In May, an Emerson College Polling survey found Buttigieg at the top of the list of potential presidential contenders, leading California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and others.
In addition to discussing his future in federal politics, Buttigieg also discussed President Donald Trump’s handling of the Iran war — which reached its 5-month mark two weeks ago — the changing landscape of U.S. jobs due to the rise of artificial intelligence, and the growing national debt, all issues he could face if he ultimately returns to the White House.
Following his 2020 presidential campaign, Buttigieg gained prominence within the Democratic Party, eventually leading to his confirmation as Transportation Secretary. In February 2021, he became the first openly gay Cabinet member to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
In addition to his experience as an elected official, the 44-year-old served as a Navy intelligence officer in the reserves from 2009-2017, including a seven-month deployment to Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg came out as gay in 2015 and later married his husband, Chasten Glezman, in 2018. The couple now has two children: twins.
Buttigieg also has an extensive educational background.
He graduated from Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in history and literature and later became a Rhodes Scholar, attending the University of Oxford, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, politics, and economics.
This is not the first time Buttigieg has made headlines this year.
In June, he went public about being falsely accused of posing a threat to his children’s safety. An anonymous police report claimed he was a danger to his 4-year-old twins and was not allowed to be with them until after police interviews were conducted.
The police report was later determined to be false. The Washington Blade reached out to the Michigan State Police to ask what course of action, if any, would be taken against the woman who filed the false report, but the agency did not answer the question.
The Blade reached out to Buttigieg’s team for comment on his potential 2028 presidential bid, but did not hear back before publication.
Congress
House blocks effort to codify transgender servicemember ban into law
Lawmakers approved two anti-trans NDAA amendments
The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have codified a ban transgender servicemembers in the military.
The bipartisan vote was 212-217.
The NDAA is for the 2027 fiscal year and sets policies for the Defense Department programs and activities and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.
U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed the amendment on July 21. It stated that all personnel are required to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline.
Human Rights Campaign Senior Director of Government Affairs Jennifer Pike Bailey stated that she is grateful for the bipartisan vote that rejected President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “dangerous and discriminatory policy that has kicked brave transgender servicemembers out of the military and weakened our national security.”
“Everyone who meets the same rigorous standards should be able to serve their country. We should honor that patriotism, particularly in this moment where we are witnessing brave servicemembers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, instead of ending their careers and politicizing their existence. We’re grateful that a permanent extension of this ban failed, and we will keep fighting to reverse this senseless policy,” Bailey said.
Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, stated that he and his members put in countless hours of work to kill the amendment.
“When Americans know they or their families are going to be targeted by or not supported by the military, that leads them to avoid signing up to serve or staying in the service — making it harder to keep the ranks of the armed services full and our nation safe. My colleagues in the Equality Caucus and I will continue working to prevent these attacks on our servicemembers and their families from becoming law,” Takano said.
According to the Congressional Equality Caucus, two other bills could potentially be passed that would also target the transgender community, both of which were proposed by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).
The first was a bill that would have prohibited gender-related medical care under TRICARE and to prevent TRICARE from covering certain gender-related medical procedures and treatments, which was approved in a vote of 219-208.
The second was a bill that would have prohibited male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools. DoDEA schools are Department of Defense Dependents Schools, which is a network of primary and secondary schools.
The amendment was approved in a vote of 221-203.
Don’t miss summer productions at Clear Space in Rehoboth Beach
New LGBTQ visitor center slated for Wilmington, Del.
PHOTOS: World Pride March
Tens of thousands take part in World Pride March
PHOTOS: Daddy Issues at Kiki
Continue to engage in community after Pride month
D.C.’s Mary’s House For Older Adults names new executive director
Suzanne Goode is not good for Rehoboth Beach
Calendar: August 7-13
