News
Texas Nat’l Guard agrees to process same-sex partner benefits
State initially refused to provide military ID cards to gay spouses
Alicia Butler (left) and Judith Cedville with daugher, Jordan, were denied benefits from Texas Military Forces (Photo courtesy of Alicia Butler).
After initially resisting a Pentagon directive to enroll the same-sex spouses of troops into benefit programs, the Texas National Guard announced on Tuesday that it has come to an agreement that will allow its facilities to process these applications for gay service members.
In a statement on Tuesday, Texas Military Forces said the Defense Department has approved a new procedure in which the Pentagon will provide federal personnel, funding and the use of federal personnel systems to enroll the spouses of all troops — gay and straight — into the benefit system.
According to Texas Military Forces, which comprises the state’s national guard, this agreement resolves the conflict of the edict from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel saying spousal benefits should be available to gay troops everywhere and Texas’ state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
“We look forward to having the ability to process the benefits our service members and their families are entitled to,” said Lt. Col. Joanne MacGregor, the state public affairs officer.
Although Hagel said spousal benefits for gay troops, including health, pension and housing benefits, should be available nationwide in August following the Supreme Court decision against Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, Texas initially refused to process applications to grant the same-sex spouses of troops a military ID card, citing state law barring same-sex marriage.
After other states, including Oklahoma, Louisiana and Mississippi, made similar announcements, Hagel issued a second edict saying he’s directed the National Guard Bureau to ensure states comply, threatening unspecified consequences if they continued to refuse.
Jennifer Atkinson, a Texas National Guard spokesperson, confirmed that same-sex couples are now able to apply for spousal benefits at installations within the state.
“Couples can now apply at Texas bases — including Camp Mabry,” Atkinson said. “Since the Department of Defense (DoD) directed the enrollment of same-sex spouses effective Sept. 3, 2013, we have worked diligently with the Pentagon and the National Guard Bureau to find a solution that would allow us to follow Texas state law while adhering to DoD policy.”
Atkinson later clarified that same-sex couples can apply for benefits at all installations with Real-Time Automated Personnel Identification Systems.
A defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agreement only applies to Texas and not other states that are still holding out. Still, the official said the Pentagon views the decision as welcome news.
According to the National Guard Bureau, the decision from Texas to acquiesce means Mississippi, Georgia and Louisiana are the only states that have yet to comply.
On Nov. 7, Oklahoma announced that its state-run national guard facilities are getting out of the business of processing benefits altogether and are directing everyone — gay and straight — to federally-run installations within the state. However, Oklahoma isn’t considered a non-compliant state.
Following the announcement, Alicia Butler, a lesbian who was earlier blocked from enrolling into the benefits system with her spouse, First Lt. Judith Chedville, re-applied for those benefits at Camp Mabry later on Wednesday and received her military ID.
“I am so pleased to have this spousal ID card and begin to access a range of benefits,” Butler said in a statement. “My wife served our country and our family needs support like all military families.”
Lambda Legal, which had represented Butler and wrote a letter calling on Texas Military Forces to reverse its earlier decision to block enrollment, praised the change.
“We are thrilled for Alicia and Judith who just wanted to take steps, like all military families, to access critical support networks and benefits provided to families of service members,” said Lambda Legal Staff Attorney Paul Castillo. “Texas Military Forces implements a host of federal benefits programs for all National Guard units in the state and it should be no different for married same-sex couples.”
An LGBT advocate, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the purported change announced by the Texas Military Forces is a “crock” because federal funds and systems were already being used to enroll spouses in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System. The announced change, the advocate said, is a way for Texas Military Forces to save face as it acquiesced to the Pentagon’s demands.
After issuing a statement Tuesday evening criticizing the Texas National Guard for adopting a system similar to Oklahoma’s, the American Military Partners Association issued a second statement Wednesday praising the move, saying they since received clarification on the decision.
“We applaud the Texas Military Forces for changing course and the Department of Defense for making sure this issue is resolved in Texas,” said AMPA President Stephen Peters. “All military spouses, regardless of orientation or gender, deserve to treated with the same dignity, respect, and support for their sacrifices in support of our nation, no matter what state they serve in. We urge the remaining states who have not yet complied with Department of Defense policy to do so quickly and affirm their commitment to all military families.”
Rehoboth Beach
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
Attendees encouraged to wear appropriate gear
Diego’s in Rehoboth Beach hosts a monthly leather happy hour. April’s edition is scheduled for Friday, April 10, 5-7 p.m. Attendees are encouraged to wear appropriate gear. The event is billed as an official event of BLUF, the free community group for men interested in leather. After happy hour, the attendees are encouraged to reconvene at Local Bootlegging Company for dinner, which allows cigar smoking. There’s no cover charge for either event.
District of Columbia
Celebrations of life planned for Sean Bartel
Two memorial events scheduled in D.C.
Two celebrations of life are planned for Sean Christopher Bartel, 48, who was found deceased on a hiking trail in Argentina on or around March 15. Bartel began his career as a television news reporter and news anchor at stations in Louisville, Ky., and Evansville, Ind., before serving as Senior Video Producer for the D.C.-based International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union from 2013 to 2024.
A memorial gathering is planned for Friday, April 10, 11:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. at the IBEW International Office (900 7th St., N.W.), according to a statement by the DC Gay Flag Football League, where Bartel was a longtime member. A celebration of life is planned that same evening, 6-8 p.m. at Trade (1410 14th St., N.W.).
Puerto Rico
The ‘X’ returns to court
1st Circuit hears case over legal recognition of nonbinary Puerto Ricans
Eight months ago, I wrote about this issue at a time when it had not yet reached the judicial level it faces today. Back then, the conversation moved through administrative decisions, public debate, and political resistance. It was unresolved, but it had not yet reached this point.
That has now changed.
Lambda Legal appeared before the 1st U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston, urging the court to uphold a lower court ruling that requires the government of Puerto Rico to issue birth certificates that accurately reflect the identities of nonbinary individuals. The appeal follows a district court decision that found the denial of such recognition to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
This marks a turning point. The issue is no longer theoretical. A court has already determined that unequal treatment exists.
The argument presented by the plaintiffs is grounded in Puerto Rico’s own legal framework. Identity birth certificates are not static historical records. They are functional documents used in everyday life. They are required to access employment, education, and essential services. Their purpose is practical, not symbolic.
Within that framework, the exclusion of nonbinary individuals does not stem from a legal limitation. Puerto Rico already allows gender marker corrections on birth certificates for transgender individuals under the precedent established in Arroyo Gonzalez v. Rosselló Nevares. In addition, the current Civil Code recognizes the existence of identity documents that reflect a person’s lived identity beyond the original birth record.
The issue lies in how the law is applied.
Recognition is granted within specific categories, while those who do not identify within that binary structure remain excluded. That exclusion is now at the center of this case.
Lambda Legal’s position is straightforward. Requiring individuals to carry documents that do not reflect who they are forces them into misrepresentation in essential aspects of daily life. This creates practical barriers, exposes them to scrutiny, and places them in a constant state of vulnerability.
The plaintiffs, who were born in Puerto Rico, have made clear that access to accurate identification is not symbolic. It is a basic condition for moving through the world without contradiction imposed by the state.
The fact that this case is now being addressed in the federal court system adds another layer of significance. This is not a pending policy discussion or a legislative proposal. It is a constitutional question. The analysis is not about political preference, but about rights and equal protection under the law.
This case does not exist in isolation.
It unfolds within a broader context in which debates over identity and rights have increasingly been shaped by the growing influence of conservative perspectives in public policy, both in the United States and in Puerto Rico. At the local level, this influence has been reflected in legislative discussions where religious arguments have begun to intersect with decisions that should be grounded in constitutional principles. That intersection creates tension around the separation of church and state and has direct consequences for access to rights.
Recognizing this context is not an attack on faith or religious practice. It is an acknowledgment that when certain perspectives move into the realm of public authority, they can shape outcomes that affect specific communities.
From within Puerto Rico, this is not a distant debate. It is a lived reality. It is present in the difficulty of presenting identification that does not match one’s identity, and in the consequences that follow in workplaces, schools, and government spaces.
The progression of this case introduces the possibility of change within the applicable legal framework. Not because it resolves every tension surrounding the issue, but because it establishes a legal examination of a practice that has long operated under exclusion.
Eight months ago, the conversation centered on ongoing developments. Today, there is already a judicial finding that identifies a violation of rights. What remains is whether that finding will be upheld on appeal.
That process does not guarantee an immediate outcome, but it shifts the ground.
The debate is no longer theoretical.
It is now before the courts.
Calendar: April 10-16
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
Celebrations of life planned for Sean Bartel
The ‘X’ returns to court
LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times
D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America
Risking it all for love during World War II
PHOTOS: The Bonnet Ball
Key lifestyle changes can help patients cope with diabetes
