Connect with us

National

Hawaii governor reflects on state’s long marriage struggle

‘As Hawaii is concerned, we succeeded yesterday’

Published

on

Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii, gay, Washington Blade
Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii, Washington Blade, gay

Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie on Nov. 13, 2013, signs his state’s same-sex marriage bill into law. (Photo courtesy of State of Hawaii/Office of the Governor)

Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie on Thursday said yesterday’s ceremony during which he signed a bill that extends marriage rights to same-sex couples in his state was more than a celebration.

“It was more like an acknowledgement of the culmination of many years of what we call in Hawaii as part of our Aloha spirit: patient perseverance,” he told the Washington Blade during a telephone interview from Honolulu.

Abercrombie signed the measure into law at the Hawaii Convention Center in Honolulu one day after the state Senate approved it by a 19-4 margin.

Senate Bill 1 passed in the Hawaii House of Representatives on Nov. 8 after lawmakers debated it for more than 12 hours. The chamber two days earlier approved the measure on its second reading following five days of testimony from SB1 supporters and opponents.

Abercrombie told the Blade he initially thought the special legislative session to debate SB1 that began on Oct. 28 would have ended within a week — and not 15 days.

“It is still a reflection of the legislative process that’s undertaken so that everybody clearly has an opportunity to speak,” he said. “Much of it, of course, was repetitive and I’m sorry to say that some of it could only be called as rate, but that was more a sign of less of conspiracy than it was the intensity with which the opponents were operating.”

Lesbian state Rep. Jo Jordan, who Abercrombie appointed in 2011, sparked outrage among LGBT rights advocates when she voted against SB1.

“I wish we had had perhaps a little more opportunity to discuss the issue,” Abercrombie said. “I expect that she has her set of reasons. Whether or not I agree with all those reasons I don’t know.”

Abercrombie added that same-sex marriage supporters criticized him because he did not call a special legislative session “when they wanted me to do it.”

“My position always was and always has been I need 13 votes in the Senate and 26 votes in the House,” he said. “I don’t need rhetorical victories. I don’t need tactical advice that has nothing to do with keeping your eye on the prize, which is to get the bill passed and get a bill passed that will stand up to constitutional investigation and vetting and be able to say secure the necessary votes to get it on my desk.”

Then-Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Steven Levinson in 1993 ruled the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples is unconstitutional. This landmark decision prompted Congress three years later to pass the Defense of Marriage Act that prohibited the federal government from legally recognizing gay nuptials.

The U.S. Supreme Court in June found a portion of DOMA unconstitutional.

Abercrombie said Levinson’s ruling “formalized a discussion” that he said had already been taking place in Hawaii about how to extend relationship recognition to same-sex couples in the state. He noted he backed civil unions for gays and lesbians before 1993.

“I was the object of a lot of criticism,” Abercrombie told the Blade. “I felt that we had to move this along in a process that would enable us to succeed politically as opposed to making what I felt would be a moral point, if you will, that was doomed to failure at that time and I felt would hold us back from achieving marriage equality.”

Hawaii voters in 1998 approved a state constitutional amendment that allowed the legislature to ban same-sex marriage.

The state’s civil unions law took effect in 2012, but a federal judge in August of that year dismissed a lawsuit filed on behalf of two gay couples who sought marriage rights in Hawaii. The plaintiffs subsequently petitioned the U.S. Ninth Circuit to hear their case alongside a second lawsuit that seeks to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples in Nevada.

Abercrombie cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling against DOMA and California’s Proposition 8 in his decision not to defend Hawaii’s same-sex marriage ban in the aforementioned lawsuit.

“It was clear to me in the wake of the Supreme Court rulings that the civil unions law which I signed right after I was sworn in obviated the prohibition,” he said. “I said ‘look, I can’t defend something that I don’t think has legal validity.’”

Abercrombie gives pen used to sign SB1 to Levinson

Hawaii is among the 15 states and D.C. in which same-sex couples can now legally marry.

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn on Nov. 20 is scheduled to sign a measure that will allow nuptials for gays and lesbians in his state.

A judge on Thursday refused to consider state Rep. Bob McDermott’s motion that would have blocked SB1 from taking effect on Dec. 2.

Abercrombie told the Blade one of the things about which he thought before he signed SB1 into law was seeking the Human Rights Campaign’s support during his 1986 congressional campaign. He recalled meeting two HRC staffers inside their small office near the U.S. Capitol.

“We’ve come a long, long way from an upstairs office somewhere on D Street,” Abercrombie said. “As I said yesterday, people who have been forced to be invisible all their lives are now visible to themselves and the whole world.”

Abercrombie also gave the pen he used to sign SB1 into law to Levinson.

“It was never a question in my mind of what Hawaii precipitated in 1993 would succeed,” Abercrombie told the Blade. “It was always a question in my mind [as to whether] we put together events [and] timing in such a way as to succeed. And at least as Hawaii is concerned we succeeded yesterday.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports

27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.

In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”

In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.

The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.

“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.

He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”

“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”

Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”

Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House

University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

Published

on

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Screen capture: C-SPAN)

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”

The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.

“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”

Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”

Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”

“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”

Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.

Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.

The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.

Continue Reading

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

Popular