Connect with us

News

Obamas, Bidens won’t attend Russian Olympics

Two lesbian athletes chosen amid calls for stand against Putin’s anti-gay crackdown

Published

on

Billie Jean King, tennis, sports, gay news, Washington Blade
Billie Jean King, tennis, sports, gay news, Washington Blade

Billie Jean King will be part of the U.S. delegation to the Sochi Olympics. (Photo by Andrew Coppa Photography)

Amid concerns over the anti-gay climate in Russia, the White House announced on Tuesday the U.S. delegation to the Winter Olympics in Sochi wouldn’t include either the Obama or the Biden families, but instead two accomplished members of the LGBT community.

Billie Jean King, a member of the President’s Council on Fitness, Sports & Nutrition and recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, was tapped as one of five members of the delegation for the opening ceremony. For the closing ceremonies, lesbian ice hockey Olympian Caitlin Cahow, was named as part of the five-member delegation.

In the announcement on Tuesday, no member of the first or second families was named as part of the delegation for the opening or closing ceremony. Also, no statement from Obama or any White House official accompanied the announcement.

Instead, Janet Napolitano, president of the University of California system and former secretary of homeland security, was tapped to the lead the delegation for the opening ceremony. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns was selected to lead the delegation for the closing ceremony.

Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said in a follow-up email to the Blade that Obama is proud of U.S. athletes and will root for them even though Obama’s schedule “doesn’t allow him to travel to Sochi.”

“President Obama is extremely proud of our U.S. athletes and looks forward to cheering them on from Washington as they compete in the best traditions of the Olympic spirit,” Inouye said. “He knows they will showcase to the world the best of America – diversity, determination, and teamwork.”

Inouye maintained Obama has sent a “high-level delegation” to Sochi in his place that includes several individuals who served or have once served in the administration.

“The U.S. delegation to the Olympic Games represents the diversity that is the United States,” Inouye said. “All our delegation members are distinguished by their accomplishments in government service, civic activism, and sports. We are proud of each and every one of them and think they will serve as great ambassadors of the United States to the Olympic Games.”

The White House announced King and Cahow would take part in the delegation after the U.S.-based international rights group Human Rights First called on the administration to include LGBT people as part of the delegation. The call was echoed by other LGBT groups: the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, All Out and the Council for Global Equality.

Concerns over the anti-LGBT record in Russia consist of the country’s recently passed law barring pro-gay propaganda to minors, another prohibiting same-sex couples in foreign countries from adopting Russian children and continuing reports of anti-LGBT hostility and violence in the country.

Shawn Gaylord, advisory counsel to Human Rights First, praised the Obama administration for taking the organization’s advice about the inclusion of LGBT leaders in the U.S. delegation to the Olympics.

“We are pleased to see the Obama administration take action in line with our recommendations to have LGBT people included in the delegation and believe this can send a positive message to the LGBT community in Russia, as well as to Russian government officials,” Gaylord said. “The selection of this delegation displays to the international community the American values of respect and equality for all.”

Mark Bromley, chair of the Council for Global Equality, said the absence of the Obamas and the Bidens from the delegation was appropriate as was the inclusion of LGBT figures.

“We are pleased that the delegation is at a lower level than might otherwise be expected and that it includes such an important LGBT sports legend,” Bromley said. “In both respects, we hope the delegation’s composition and its members will give voice to our country’s disdain for Russia’s persecution of its LGBT citizens.”

Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, also commended the White House for its choices regarding the Olympics delegation.

“Given Russia’s deplorable law against LGBT people, the makeup of this delegation is entirely appropriate,” Cole-Schwartz said. “Particularly the inclusion of openly gay athletes sends a message to the world that the U.S. values the civil and human rights of LGBT people.”

The Obamas’ decision not to attend the Olympics in 2014 — unlike in 2012, when Michelle Obama led the delegation to the London Olympics — follows the announcement by several world leaders that they would skip the games. Notably, the announcement from the White House came less than two months ahead of the games; an announcement was made four months ahead of time for the 2012 Olympics in London.

The Belgian press reported on Tuesday that Belgian and Flemish Prime Ministers, Elio Di Rupo and Kris Peeters, have no plans to attend the Winter Olympics. Without explaining the decision further, French President Francois Hollande and other French officials announced they wouldn’t attend the Olympics. German President Joachim Gauck and European Union commissioner Viviane Reding earlier made similar announcements.

In an August interview, the Blade asked King whether she feels athletes should boycott the Olympics over the anti-gay atmosphere in country. Recalling Tommie Smith and John Carlos, who raised their fists in the air as they stood on the medal podium at the 1968 Summer Olympics in Mexico City, King said athletes should decide for themselves.

“The athletes who have the most to derive from it and the least to derive from it if they don’t go, I think they should get the vote,” she said. “This is the Olympics. This is about the athletes and the fans, so it’s a really hard call.”

Michael K. Lavers contributed to this report.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Court orders Pride flag to return to Stonewall

Lambda Legal, Washington Litigation Group filed federal lawsuit

Published

on

Pride flag restored by activists at Stonewall National Monument in New York following the removal earlier this year. (Screen capture insert via Reuters YouTube)

The Pride flag will once again fly over the Stonewall National Monument in New York following a court order requiring the National Park Service to raise it over the site.

The decision follows a lawsuit filed by Lambda Legal and the Washington Litigation Group in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which challenged the removal as unconstitutional under the Administrative Procedure Act and argued that the government unlawfully targeted the LGBTQ community.

In February, the NPS removed the Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument, the first national monument dedicated to LGBTQ rights and history in the U.S. The move followed a Jan. 21 memorandum issued by President Donald Trump-appointed NPS Director Jessica Bowron restricting which flags may be flown at national parks. The directive limited displays to official government flags, with narrow exceptions for those deemed to serve an “official purpose.”

Plaintiffs successfully argued that the Pride flag meets that standard, given Stonewall’s status as the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ rights movement. They also contended that the policy violated the APA by bypassing required public input and improperly applying agency rules.

The lawsuit named Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Bowron, and Amy Sebring, superintendent of Manhattan sites for the NPS, as defendants. Plaintiffs included the Gilbert Baker Foundation, Village Preservation, Equality New York, and several individuals.

The court found that the memorandum — while allowing limited exceptions for historical context purposes — was applied unlawfully in this case. As part of the settlement, the NPS is required to rehang the Pride flag on the monument’s official flagpole within seven days, where it will remain permanently.

“The sudden, arbitrary, and capricious removal of the Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument was yet another act by this administration to erase the LGBTQ+ community,” said Karen Loewy, co-counsel for plaintiffs and Lambda Legal’s Senior Counsel and Director of Constitutional Law Practice. “Today, the government has pledged to restore this important symbol back to where it belongs.”

“This is a complete victory for our clients and for the LGBTQ+ community,” said Alexander Kristofcak, lead counsel for plaintiffs and a lawyer with Washington Litigation Group. “The government has acknowledged what we argued from day one: the Pride flag belongs at Stonewall. The flag will be restored and it will fly officially and permanently. And we will remain vigilant to ensure that the government sticks to the deal.”

“Gilbert Baker created the Rainbow Pride flag as a symbol of hope and liberation,” said Charles Beal, president of the Gilbert Baker Foundation. “Today, that symbol is restored to the place where it belongs, standing watch over the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement.”

“The government tried to erase an important symbol of the LGBTQ+ community, and the community said no,” said Amanda Babine, executive director of Equality New York. “Today’s accomplishment proves that when we stand together and fight back, we win.”

“The removal of the Pride flag from Stonewall was an attempt to erase LGBTQ+ history and undermine the rule of law,” said Andrew Berman, executive director of Village Preservation. “This settlement restores both.”

With Loewy on the complaint are Douglas F. Curtis, Camilla B. Taylor, Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Kenneth D. Upton Jr., Jennifer C. Pizer, and Nephetari Smith from Lambda Legal. With Kristofcak on the complaint are Mary L. Dohrmann, Sydney Foster, Kyle Freeny, James I. Pearce, and Nathaniel Zelinsky from Washington Litigation Group.

Continue Reading

Sri Lanka

Sri Lankan government withdraws support for LGBTQ tourism initiative

Prominent religious leaders criticized campaign

Published

on

(Photo by PaulCowan/Bigstock)

The Sri Lankan government has withdrawn its support for an initiative that encourages LGBTQ tourists to visit the country.

The Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority last September partnered with Equal Ground, an LGBTQ rights group, on the initiative.

The Daily Mirror, a Sri Lankan newspaper, reported Sri Lanka Development Authority Chair Buddhika Hewawasam in a letter to Equal Ground Executive Director Rosanna Flamer-Caldera said his agency recognizes “the potential of this project to diversify our tourism markets and position Sri Lanka as a safe, inclusive, and welcoming destination for all travelers.”

Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, the archbishop of Colombo, along other prominent Christian and Buddhist leaders criticized the initiative. Attorney General Parinda Ranasinghe on Feb. 10 indicated the Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority had rescinded its support for the campaign.

Flamer-Caldera on April 10 acknowledged the criticism over the initiative but added “the fact that the letter has been rescinded doesn’t make any difference.”

“We’re still doing work with the tourism industry who have basically opened up to us and are willing participants in the project,” said Flamer-Caldera. “They realize the potential of the boost to our tourism industry as well as boosting our economy.”

Sections 365 and 365A of Sri Lanka’s colonial-era penal code criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual relations.

The U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women in 2022 ruled the criminalization law violated Flamer-Caldera’s rights. The Sri Lankan Supreme Court in 2023 said a bill that would decriminalize homosexuality is constitutional.

Transgender people in Sri Lanka since 2016 have been able to request a Gender Recognition Certificate that allows them to legally change their name and gender on ID cards. Flamer-Caldera noted to the Blade that LGBTQ rights opponents have challenged the Gender Recognition Certificate in the Supreme Court.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

Trump budget targets ‘gender extremism’

Proposed spending package would target ‘leftist’ political ideologies

Published

on

The FBI seal on granite. (Photo courtesy of Bigstock)

The White House submitted its 2027 budget request to Congress last month, outlining a push for the Federal Bureau of Investigation to “proactively” target what it describes as “extremism” related to gender — raising concerns about the potential for law enforcement to target LGBTQ people.

The Trump-Vance administration’s 2027 budget request, submitted to Congress on April 4, proposes a dramatic increase in national security and law enforcement spending, while reducing foreign aid and restructuring multiple domestic security programs. In total, the administration is requesting $2.16 trillion in discretionary budget authority (including mandatory resources), a 15.3 percent increase over the 2026 proposal.

Central to the proposal is the creation of a new “NSPM-7 Joint Mission Center,” a direct follow-up to the September 2025 National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7). The directive instructs the Justice Department, the FBI, and other national security agencies to combat what the administration defines as “political violence in America,” effectively reshaping the Joint Terrorism Task Force network to focus on “leftist” political ideologies, according to reporting by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein.

The American Civil Liberties Union has characterized NSPM-7 as a way for President Donald Trump to intimidate his political enemies.

In a press release following the memorandum, Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU’s National Security Project, said, “President Trump has launched yet another effort to investigate and intimidate his critics,” and had described the move as an “intimidation tactic against those standing up for human rights and civil liberties.”

The proposed mission center would include personnel from 10 federal agencies tasked with targeting “domestic terrorists” associated with a wide range of ideologies. Among them is what the administration labels “extremism” related to gender, alongside categories such as “anti-Americanism,” “anti-capitalism,” “anti-Christianity,” and “support for the overthrow of the U.S. government.” The document also cites “hostility toward those who hold traditional American views” on family, religion, and morality — language LGBTQ advocates have increasingly warned could be used to frame queer and transgender rights movements as ideological threats.

The mission center is one component of a proposed $166 million increase in the FBI’s counterterrorism budget.

In total, the FBI would receive $12.5 billion for salaries and expenses under the proposal, a $1.9 billion increase. Planned investments include unmanned aerial systems operations and counter-drone capabilities, counterterrorism efforts, and security preparations for the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. The budget also cites 67,000 FBI arrests since Jan. 20, 2026, which it describes as a 197 percent increase from the prior year.

When Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001, it also enacted 18 U.S.C. § 2331(5), which defines domestic terrorism as activities involving acts dangerous to human life that violate criminal laws and are intended to intimidate or coerce civilians or influence government policy through violence. That statutory definition has not changed.

However, federal agencies have historically categorized domestic terrorism threats into groups such as racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism, anti-government or anti-authority violent extremism, and other threats, including those tied to bias based on religion, gender, or sexual orientation.

The language in the budget suggests a shift in how those categories are interpreted and applied — particularly by explicitly linking “extremism” to gender and to perceived opposition to “traditional” views — without any corresponding change to federal law. Only Congress has the power to change the definition of domestic terrorism by passing legislation.

The budget document states:

“DT lone offenders will continue to pose significant detection and disruption challenges because of their capacity for independent radicalization to violence, ability to mobilize discretely, and access to firearms. Additionally, in recent years, heinous assassinations and other acts of political violence in the United States have dramatically increased. Commonly, this violent conduct relates to views associated with anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the U.S. government; extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility toward those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.”

This language echoes earlier actions by the Trump-Vance administration targeting trans people.

On the first day of his second term, President Trump signed Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

The order establishes a strict binary definition of sex and withdraws federal recognition of trans people.

“It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female,” the order states. “‘Sex’ shall refer to an individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female. ‘Sex’ is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of ‘gender identity.’”

Appropriations committees in both chambers are expected to begin hearings in the coming weeks.

Continue Reading

Popular