Connect with us

News

Udall seeks action on benefits for gay veterans

Asks Obama to stop enforcing place of residence statute for married couples

Published

on

Mark Udall, Democratic Party, United States Senate, Colorado, gay news, Washington Bladea
Mark Udall, Democratic Party, United States Senate, Colorado, gay news, Washington Blade

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is calling on the Obama administration to stop enforcing portions of Title 38. (Photo public domain)

Months after the Obama administration announced it would no longer enforce a portion of U.S. code barring married gay veterans from receiving certain spousal benefits, one Colorado Democrat is calling for further action to ensure former troops receive these benefits no matter where they live.

In a letter dated Nov. 11, Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) calls on President Obama to cease enforcement of Section 103(c) of Title 38 of the U.S. Code, which looks to the state of residency, not the state of celebration, in determining whether a veteran is married.

“You have been a tremendous leader in working to end discrimination against the LGBT community during your presidency, and I know you would agree that there is no military interest or other governmental purpose met in continuing to apply the law in a way that disadvantages same sex couples,” Udall writes. “In this spirit, I ask that this discriminatory action cease while efforts to change the statute proceed through Congress.”

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court decision against the Defense of Marriage Act, U.S. Attorney General had announced in September the administration wouldn’t enforce the portions of Title 38 that define marriage for veterans in opposite-sex terms. But other portions of the law remain under enforcement.

As noted in the Udall letter, Section 103(c) of Title 38 of the U.S. code prohibits the recognition of a veteran’s same-sex marriage if the couple apply for benefits in a state that doesn’t recognize their marriage.

“In determining whether or not a person is or was the spouse of a veteran, their marriage shall be proven as valid for the purposes of all laws administered by the Secretary according to the law of the place where the parties resided at the time of the marriage or the law of the place where the parties resided when the right to benefits accrued,” the law states.

According to an accompanying statement from Udall’s office, this section of the law has caused continued issues. Two Colorado residents, one of whom served in the Air Force for 10 years and was deployed four times, were denied federal VA benefits because Colorado doesn’t recognize their marriage. The couple lives in Colorado, but married in another state earlier this year.

Udall writes that Obama should apply the same standard to the section of Title 38 prohibiting recognition of gay veterans’ marriage in non-marriage equality states as he did for other sections of the law.

“Addressing this particular section of the law in Title 38 and ensuring that other veterans around the country do not suffer the same injustice my constituents have endured is important, is just and is urgent,” Udall said. “Therefore I ask you to work with the Attorney General and the VA to take immediate action.”

Some of the spousal benefits allocated under Title 38 are disability benefits, survivor benefits and joint burial at a veteran’s cemetery.

Veterans’ benefits are but one portion of U.S. code preventing benefits from flowing to married same-sex couples in non-marriage equality states even after the court decision against DOMA. The Social Security Administration has yet to announce whether it will award spousal benefits to married gay couples living in states that don’t recognize their unions because of a similar statute under Social Security law.

The White House deferred to the Department of Veterans Affairs for comment, which said the situation is currently under review.

“VA is working closely with the Department of Justice to develop guidance to process cases involving same-sex spousal benefits, and to implement necessary changes swiftly and smoothly in order to deliver the best services to all our nation’s Veterans,” said VA spokesperson Drew Brookie. “Our commitment to provide all Veterans and their families with their earned care and benefits will continue to be our focus as VA implements the President’s decision.”

Advocates who work on issues for LGBT service members and post-DOMA implementation say they share the concerns that Udall expresses in the letter.

Stephen Peters, president of the American Military Partners Association, called for clarity from the administration.

“It was previously assumed that the announcement by the Justice Department concerning Title 38 meant that the Veterans Administration (VA) was moving toward equal recognition and support for all veterans and their families, regardless of their orientation or gender of their spouse,” Peters said. “However, there is much confusion on why veterans with same-gender spouses are still being denied equal benefits. We need a clear answer from the administration.”

Fred Sainz, vice president of communications for the Human Rights Campaign, also said the Obama administration needs to articulate a clear path forward.

“We certainly need and want clarity just as soon as possible from the VA as to how they will apply the place of residence statute,” Sainz said.

Udall’s full letter follows:

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I write today about a critical issue affecting our nation’s veterans and their families. As you know, earlier this year the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act. Since that time the Department of Justice has been working with federal departments and agencies to align their rules and restrictions to conform with the court’s finding in United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (June 26, 2013).

It is in that context that I am requesting that you direct the Executive Branch to cease enforcement of Section 103(c) of Title 38 of the United States Code. Section 103(c) reads as follows:

“In determining whether or not a person is or was the spouse of a veteran, their marriage shall be proven as valid for the purposes of all laws administered by the Secretary according to the law of the place where the parties resided at the time of the marriage or the law of the place where the parties resided when the right to benefits accrued.”

In Colorado, the effect of this section of the law has been to discriminate and deny appropriate Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits to veterans and their spouses. You have been a tremendous leader in working to end discrimination against the LGBT community during your presidency, and I know you would agree that there is no military interest or other governmental purpose met in continuing to apply the law in a way that disadvantages same sex couples. In this spirit, I ask that this discriminatory action cease while efforts to change the statute proceed through Congress.

As you know, on September 4, 2013, Attorney General Holder notified Congress that, as President, you directed the Executive Branch to no longer enforce Sections 101(3) and 101(31) of Title 38 because those sections of law appear unconstitutional in light of Windsor. For the same reason, I believe it is consistent to expand the suspension of enforcement to Section 103(c).

There is a universal feeling in this country that our servicemembers, veterans and their families deserve respect and support during and after their service and the kind of discriminatory treatment this law furthers is simply unacceptable. Addressing this particular section of the law in Title 38 and ensuring that other veterans around the country do not suffer the same injustice my constituents have endured is important, is just and is urgent. Therefore I ask you to work with the Attorney General and the VA to take immediate action.

Thank you for your consideration of this request. We, as a nation, have made historic progress over the past year in furthering LGBT equality, due in large part to your leadership.

I look forward to your response and stand ready to work with you to fix this issue for all of our nation’s veterans.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

Report: Grenell wants Russian ambassadorship

Country’s anti-LGBTQ record a reported barrier

Published

on

Special envoy for “special missions” Richard Grenell speaks at the Log Cabin Republicans Big Tent Event in 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Richard Grenell, President Donald Trump’s special envoy for “special missions,” is making it known that he is interested in the Russian ambassadorship.

According to reporting by the Daily Mail, Grenell has “floated” his interest in the role to coworkers, but issues surrounding the former German ambassador’s sexuality have made securing the position more difficult.

“He had an interest in the job — or at least he floated the idea to select colleagues. But Putin’s regime is extremely anti–LGBTQ, so I’m sure they didn’t take that thought too seriously,” one source close to Grenell told the Daily Mail. “That would never happen anyway.”

Grenell has long been one of Trump’s closest allies and was the first openly gay person to hold a Cabinet-level position. He was ousted last month as acting director of the Kennedy Center, a position he had held since Trump reestablished the board to be composed of his political supporters in 2025.

In addition to leading the nation’s cultural arts center, Grenell previously served as the U.S. ambassador to Germany from 2018 to 2020, and as the special presidential envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations from 2019 to 2021. He was also a State Department spokesperson to the U.N. under the George W. Bush administration and a Fox News contributor.

Russia has a longstanding history of being anti-LGBTQ.

In 2013, the country passed a law banning any public endorsement of “nontraditional sexual relations” among minors. In December 2022, Putin signed legislation expanding the ban, making it illegal to promote same-sex relationships or suggest that non-heterosexual orientations are “normal” for people of any age, widening censorship across media and public life.

The Russian courts have also supported the restriction of LGBTQ identity in the country. In November 2023, Russia’s Supreme Court granted a request from the Justice Ministry to outlaw the “international LGBT movement” as “extremist,” allowing authorities to criminalize advocacy and potentially prosecute individuals for expressions of LGBTQ+ identity or support.

In addition to LGBTQ rights issues, the war between Russia and Ukraine has become a global concern. Ukraine, which was part of the former Soviet Union, includes the territory known as Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014. The annexation remains a major point of international dispute over sovereignty. Since 2022, Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine has escalated the conflict, drawing global attention and sanctions while straining U.S.-Russia relations.

The U.S. has spent $188 billion in total related to the war in Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February 2022, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The Russian ambassadorship seems to be a difficult role to fill, according to additional information presented by the Daily Mail. With Trump already being seen as relatively positive by Russian President Vladimir Putin, and with close ties to members of his Cabinet and family — like son-in-law Jared Kushner — the ambassadorship is complicated and viewed as less critical than in previous administrations.

“There is no rush to fill that role because it has now been deemed unnecessary,” another source told the U.K.-based publication.

Bob Foresman, a seasoned businessman with decades-long ties to the Kremlin, was reportedly once the frontrunner, according to the Daily Mail. Foresman served as vice chair of UBS Investment Bank and Deputy Chairman of Renaissance Capital between 2006 and 2009, and earlier led investment banking for Russia at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein from 1997 to 2000.

“This is a pattern, especially in the Trump administration — special envoys big–footing the ambassadors,” a source told the Daily Mail. “It is shocking that we are already in April and we don’t have an ambassador to one of the most important countries in the world.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Log Cabin Republicans to honor Scott Presler

Event to take place at Capitol Hill Club on Friday

Published

on

Gays for Trump, co-founded by Scott Presler participates in the "Million MAGA March" in D.C. on Nov. 14, 2020. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Log Cabin Republicans, a group representing LGBTQ conservatives and their allies within the Republican Party, is set to honor gay conservative commentator and activist Scott Presler on Friday.

Presler will receive the organization’s 2026 “Game Changer Award” during its Spring Forward Cocktail Reception at the Capitol Hill Club, a private club steps from the U.S. Capitol that regularly hosts Republican political events.

Presler has risen to prominence through a combination of pro-LGBTQ conservative activism, political organizing, and a series of controversial affiliations.

He first gained national attention in 2017 for organizing the “March Against Sharia” rallies across the country. The demonstrations came amid heightened tensions in Portland, Ore., following a deadly attack on a metro train, in which Jeremy Joseph Christian killed two people and injured others after harassing Muslim women for wearing a hijab.

The rallies were organized in partnership with ACT for America, which advocates against what it describes as “the threat of radical Islam” in the U.S. and has been labeled a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Presler volunteered with the organization for three months.

He has said he was first motivated to “fight Muslim extremism” following the Pulse nightclub massacre, he told NPR, in which a gunman who pledged allegiance to ISIS killed 49 people at an LGBTQ nightclub in Orlando, Fla. The site now serves as a memorial to the victims of the attack.

Born May 15, 1988, in Jacksonville, Fla., Presler is the son of a U.S. Navy captain and was raised in both Florida and Fairfax County. He later attended George Mason University, where he earned a degree in criminal justice.

In addition to his anti-Islam activism, Presler has been involved in a number of other high-profile and controversial efforts. He co-foundedGays for Trump” and attended their 2017 DeploraBall in Maryland for the first inauguration of Trump. According to a 2021 report from Media Matters for America, he also promoted the QAnon conspiracy movement through social media posts in 2018 and 2019.

He has also faced criticism tied to his early political work. According to a 2023 report from Politico Playbook, Presler’s work with the Republican Party of Virginia in 2016 ended after he allegedly engaged in sexual activity in a shared office space and posted explicit images online.

Beyond ideological activism, Presler has also organized community-focused initiatives. In 2019, he led a widely publicized cleanup effort in Baltimore that drew more than 100 volunteers and resulted in approximately 29 tons of trash being removed. The event was a result of criticism from President Donald Trump, calling the area, represented by then-U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) a “rodent infested mess.” 

Presler has also been active in election-related organizing, leading a two-day “Stop the Steal” demonstration at the Pennsylvania State Capitol following the 2020 presidential election. He has appeared on the “War Room” podcast hosted by former Trump strategist and well-known right-wing populist conspiracy theorist Steve Bannon.

He has also expressed a controversial stance within the LGBTQ community for supporting then-candidate Trump for President over Hillary Clinton. He told prioritizing Second Amendment rights over certain LGBTQ policy goals, saying he is more supportive of gun rights than efforts to codify same-sex marriage, and adding, “I 100 percent believe in the notion that armed gays don’t get bashed. It is our right to feel safe.”

Presler voiced his support for the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act, more commonly referred to as the “Don’t Say Gay” law, signed into law by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis in 2022.

Continue Reading

Cuba

Cuba bajo presión y sin respuestas

Cubanos no hablan en términos geopolíticos. Hablan de sobrevivir

Published

on

La Habana en 2017. (Foto de Michael Key por el Washington Blade)

Las tensiones entre Estados Unidos y Cuba han vuelto a subir de tono. No es algo nuevo, pero este momento se siente distinto. Las medidas más recientes desde Washington buscan cerrar aún más los espacios financieros del gobierno cubano, limitar sus fuentes de ingreso y presionar sectores clave de la economía. No es simbólico. Es una política directa.

Desde Estados Unidos, el mensaje es claro. Se busca provocar cambios que no han ocurrido en más de seis décadas. También hay un componente interno, una presión política que responde a sectores del exilio que llevan años exigiendo una postura más dura. Todo eso forma parte del escenario.

Pero esa es solo una parte.

Del lado cubano, la respuesta sigue un patrón conocido. El gobierno habla de agresión externa, de guerra económica, de un embargo que se endurece. Cada medida se convierte en argumento para reforzar su narrativa y cerrar filas. No hay espacio para reconocer errores propios. Todo apunta hacia afuera.

Mientras tanto, la vida en la isla va por otro camino.

La crisis energética que hoy vive Cuba no empezó con estas medidas. Lleva años acumulándose. El sistema eléctrico está deteriorado, sin mantenimiento suficiente, con fallas constantes. Los apagones no son nuevos. Lo que ha cambiado es la frecuencia y la duración.

Durante años entró petróleo a Cuba, especialmente desde Venezuela. Hubo acuerdos. Hubo suministro. Y aun así, la vida del cubano no mejoró. La electricidad seguía fallando, el combustible seguía racionado, el transporte seguía siendo un problema diario.

Entonces la pregunta sigue siendo la misma.

Si el petróleo estaba entrando, ¿por qué nada cambiaba?

¿Dónde fue a parar ese recurso?

¿Dónde está el dinero que generó?

Hoy se habla de restricciones al petróleo como si fueran la causa principal de la crisis. No lo son. Empeoran una situación ya frágil, pero no la explican completamente.

Hay una historia más larga que no se puede ignorar.

Lo mismo ocurre con las brigadas médicas.

Durante años se presentaron como un gesto de solidaridad internacional. Y en muchos casos lo fueron. Médicos cubanos trabajaron en condiciones difíciles, salvaron vidas, sostuvieron sistemas de salud en otros países. Eso es real.

Pero también funcionaron como una de las principales fuentes de ingreso del Estado cubano.

Muchos de esos profesionales no recibían el salario completo por su trabajo. Una parte significativa quedaba en manos del gobierno. En algunos casos, ni siquiera tenían control sobre el dinero que generaban.

Y hay algo más duro.

Si uno de esos médicos decidía no regresar a Cuba, ese dinero no llegaba a su familia. Se quedaba retenido.

Hoy varios países están revisando o cancelando esos acuerdos. Y otra vez, la respuesta oficial es señalar hacia afuera. Pero la pregunta sigue siendo inevitable.

¿Se está perdiendo un modelo de cooperación o un sistema que dependía del control sobre sus propios profesionales?

Dentro de Cuba, la conversación suena diferente.

La gente no habla en términos geopolíticos. Habla de sobrevivir. De cómo llegar al final del día. De los apagones, de la comida que no alcanza, del transporte que no aparece, de una vida que cada vez se hace más difícil.

Hay quienes miran las medidas de Estados Unidos con cierta expectativa. No porque quieran más escasez, sino porque sienten que el sistema no cambia por sí solo. Hay una sensación de estancamiento que pesa.

Pero esa expectativa convive con una realidad concreta.

Las sanciones no golpean primero a quienes toman decisiones. Golpean al ciudadano común. Al que hace la fila. Al que pierde la comida por falta de electricidad. Al que no tiene cómo moverse.

Esa es la contradicción.

El gobierno cubano pide solidaridad internacional. Y la recibe. Países que envían ayuda, organizaciones que se movilizan, voces que defienden a la isla.

Pero hay otra pregunta que también está ahí.

¿Esa ayuda llega realmente al pueblo?

La falta de transparencia en la distribución de recursos es parte del problema. Porque no se trata solo de lo que entra, sino de lo que realmente llega a quienes lo necesitan.

Reducir lo que pasa en Cuba a un conflicto entre dos gobiernos es no querer ver el cuadro completo.

Aquí hay responsabilidades compartidas, pero no iguales.

Estados Unidos ejerce presión con efectos reales sobre la economía cubana. Eso no se puede negar. Pero dentro de la isla hay un sistema que ha tenido décadas para corregir, para abrir, para responder a su gente, y no lo ha hecho.

Esa parte no se puede seguir esquivando.

Yo escribo esto como cubano. Desde lo que vi, desde lo que viví y desde la gente que sigue allá tratando de resolver el día.

Porque al final, más allá de lo que se diga entre gobiernos, la realidad es otra.

Cuba hoy está más apretada, sí. Pero también lleva años arrastrando problemas que nadie ha querido enfrentar de verdad.

Y mientras eso siga así, da igual lo que venga de afuera. El problema sigue estando adentro.

Nota del editor: Una versión de este comentario en inglés salió en el sitio web del Washington Blade el 7 de abril.

Continue Reading

Popular