Connect with us

National

Utah’s 1,300 gay weddings spark change in attitudes

Marriage equality in conservative state impacts public opinion, LDS Church

Published

on

Utah, gay marriage, same-sex marriage, marriage equality, gay news, Washington Blade
Utah, gay marriage, same-sex marriage, marriage equality, gay news, Washington Blade

Utahns rally in support of marriage equality. (Photo courtesy J Seth Anderson)

Although the 18-day period during which Utah allowed same-sex marriages has ended, observers say the visibility of gay couples marrying there made an indelible impression on one of the nation’s most conservative states.

Utah’s flirtation with marriage equality began on Dec. 20 when a district court ruled in favor of marriage, allowing more than 1,300 same-sex couples to marry in the state before the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay on the weddings pending appeal of the litigation.

Gov. Gary Herbert has said the state won’t recognize the same-sex marriages, but the federal government had pledged to view them as legitimate, and the events have shaken the state government, the view of state residents and even the Mormon Church.

Michael Ferguson, who wed his partner in Salt Lake City on Dec. 20 and became one-half of the first same-sex couple to marry in Utah, saw a sharp transition in support for marriage equality on social media in just two days of having marriage equality in Utah.

“I saw people who were posting some pretty horrible things about bestiality and pedophilia, and the slippery slope of world corruption, that’s going to ensue with same-sex marriages being solemnized in Utah,” Ferguson said. “Within two days of social dialogue, those same people were apologizing, and saying, ‘I can see that I was wrong and speaking from a place of ignorance, and I’m going to keep a more open-minded position in this conversation.'”

Mark Lawrence, director of the Utah-based Restore Our Humanity and the individual behind the marriage equality lawsuit, also noticed a distinct change in public opinion as the weddings took place.

“So many more people are, ‘OK, this is going to happen,” Lawrence said. “They’re coming around. They still may not agree with it, they still may not be happy with it, but I don’t think they see it anymore as the sky is falling and this is going to be the destruction of society.”

Evidence that attitudes have shifted on marriage equality in Utah is more than just anecdotal. Two new polls reveal significant growth in support for same-sex marriage in the state.

A new consumer poll made public on Sunday reveals that for the first time ever, a bare majority of Utah residents — 51.3 percent — support marriage rights for gay couples. In comparison, 43.7 percent oppose legal relationship recognition.

David Baker, a Mormon and gay D.C. activist, ran the poll over the course of last week using Google’s digital platform system, which is deemed an accurate method of polling by statisticians.

Baker said he “absolutely” believes the events in Utah in the past few weeks — especially Herbert’s decision not to recognize the marriages performed in the state — has had an impact on the perception of marriage equality in the state.

“I feel that Gov. Herbert’s decision to continue to put the rights of LGBT couples, who are legally married in the state of Utah, in a legal limbo has caused Utahns to face this issue that they may not have thought of before in the same context of legal rights for LGBT couples,” Baker said.

The results of Baker’s latest poll are along the lines of a poll published Tuesday by the Salt Lake Tribune that found Utah residents are now evenly split on whether same-sex couples in Utah should be allowed to marry — 48 percent were for it and 48 percent against it — and nearly three-fourths said same-sex couples should be allowed to have civil unions.

It’s hard to say that new support for marriage equality in Utah is the result of people seeing firsthand same-sex marriages happening in the state because no other data exists immediately before the weddings took place. However, the findings assert strong support for gay nuptials never before seen in the state.

Perhaps the most visible demonstration of this support for same-sex marriage came on Friday — coincidentally the day U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Obama administration would recognize the same-sex marriages — when an estimated 1,500 people rallied in Salt Lake City to urge Herbert to drop his appeal before the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Among the speakers was a 12-year-old boy, Riley Hackford-Peer, who said seeing his lesbian moms being able to marry in Utah was the second-happiest day of his life — right after the birth of his younger brother — and “felt like fireworks bursting in my heart.”

“Some people do not believe that I’m from a loving family because my moms are gay; they are wrong,” Riley said to applause. “I love my moms, and my moms love me and my brother, unconditionally.”

Troy Williams, a Salt Lake City gay activist and one of the organizers of the rally, said the event was intended to build off online petitions at Moveon.org calling on Herbert to let the court ruling stand in favor of marriage equality in Utah. At the time of the rally, the petitions had a total of 58,000 signatures.

“There’s so much excitement and energy right now,” Williams said. “Utah’s LGBT community is on fire and we are united like I have never seen before. There is such a sense of momentum and it was just happy coincidence that Friday morning Eric Holder announced the federal government would be acknowledging our marriages.”

Another institution showing signs of change — albeit subtle — is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is headquartered in Utah and nearly six years ago led the fight against same-sex marriage when California’s Proposition 8 came on the ballot.

In a statement the church issued on Friday, it reaffirmed its opposition to same-sex marriage, warning church officers not to employ “their ecclesiastical authority to perform marriages between two people of the same sex” and forbidding the use of church property for same-sex marriages.

Still, a portion of the statement advises members of the church to treat everyone with respect.

“While these matters will continue to evolve, we affirm that those who avail themselves of laws or court rulings authorizing same-sex marriage should not be treated disrespectfully,” the statement says. “The gospel of Jesus Christ teaches us to love and treat all people with kindness and civility — even when we disagree.”

The words came the day after news broke that the Mormon Church wouldn’t file a friend-of-the-court brief in the Utah case seeking marriage equality now before the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals — a change in trajectory for the church after it joined the religious right in making filings before the U.S. Supreme Court when it considered Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act.

Spencer Clark, executive director of Mormons for Equality, said the statement is notable because it could have come out when same-sex marriages started advancing throughout the country, but instead is happening now.

“But given the rapid spread of civil marriage equality over the past couple years it’s evident that the church has recognized that this is something that is not going away and with which they will have to co-exist,” Clark said. “The fact that this letter came out now, and not in 2001 or even 2004, is a tacit admission that the climate has incontrovertibly changed and that we as Mormons must confront reality.”

And there’s optimism going forward about the lawsuit. It’s pending before the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, which has pledged to consider the case on an expedited basis and is expected to render a decision this spring.

J. Seth Anderson, the other-half of the first gay couple married in Utah, said the short-lived nature of marriage equality in Utah demonstrates that the issue needs to be at the federal level and not left to the states.

“The states cannot be trusted to treat fairly, equally and lawfully their gay and lesbian citizens,” Anderson said. “There’s no statute in Utah law that allows the governor to select a group of marriage licenses and just declare them not recognized. It places Utah at the center of a very important national debate, and shows, I think, Utah digging its heels into keeping its position as a far right-wing rogue theocracy.”

The lawsuit may be the first to reach the U.S. Supreme Court among others seeking the court to find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

But Lawrence said he’s hoping the case ends with the Tenth Circuit ruling — with no appeal by the state of Utah to the Supreme Court — so that gay couples in Utah can continue marrying yet again as soon as possible.

“There are many people who want to this to go to SCOTUS, and if it does, we feel very strongly if we go to the Supreme Court this is going to be the end-all for the whole country,” Lawrence said. “That would be great, but I don’t want to keep our people in limbo for that long.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Treasury Department has a gay secretary but LGBTQ staff are under siege

Agency reverses course on LGBTQ inclusion under out Secretary Scott Bessent

Published

on

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A former Treasury Department employee who led the agency’s LGBTQ employee resource group says the removal of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) from its discrimination complaint forms was merely a formalization of existing policy shifts that had already taken hold following the second inauguration of President Donald Trump and his appointment of Scott Bessent — who is gay — to lead the agency. 

Christen Boas Hayes, who served on the policy team at Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) from 2020 until March of this year, told the Washington Blade during a phone interview last week that the agency had already stopped processing internal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints on the basis of anti-LGBTQ discrimination. 

“So the way that the forms are changing is a procedural recognition of something that’s already happening,” said Hayes. “Internally, from speaking to two EEO staff members, the changes are already taking place from an EEO perspective on what kind of cases will be found to have the basis for a complaint.”

The move, they said, comes amid the deterioration of support structures for LGBTQ workers at the agency since the administration’s early rollout of anti-LGBTQ executive orders, which led to “a trickle down effect of how each agency implements those and on what timeline,” decisions “typically made by the assistant secretary of management’s office and then implemented by the appropriate offices.”

At the end of June, a group of U.S. House Democrats including several out LGBTQ members raised alarms after a Federal Register notice disclosed Treasury’s plans to revise its complaint procedures. Through the agency’s Office of Civil Rights and EEO, the agency would eliminate SOGI as protected categories on the forms used by employees to initiate claims of workplace discrimination.

But Hayes’s account reveals that the paperwork change followed months of internal practice, pursuant to a wave of layoffs targeting DEI personnel and a chilling effect on LGBTQ organizing, including through ERGs. 

Hayes joined Treasury’s FinCEN in 2020 as the agency transitioned into the Biden-Harris administration, working primarily on cryptocurrency regulation and emerging technologies until they accepted a “deferred resignation” offer, which was extended to civil servants this year amid drastic staffing cuts. 

“It was two things,” Hayes said. “One was the fact that the policy work that I was very excited about doing was going to change in nature significantly. The second part was that the environment for LGBTQ staff members was increasingly negative after the release of the executive orders,” especially for trans and nonbinary or gender diverse employees. 

“At the same time,” Hayes added, “having been on the job for four years, I also knew this year was the year that I would leave Treasury. I was a good candidate for [deferred resignation], because I was already planning on leaving, but the pressures that emerged following the change in administration really pushed me to accelerate that timeline.”

Some ERGs die by formal edict, others by a thousand cuts 

Hayes became involved with the Treasury LGBTQ ERG shortly after joining the agency in 2020, when they reached out to the group’s then-president — “who also recently took the deferred resignation.”

“She said that because of the pressure that ERGs had faced under the first Trump administration, the group was rebuilding, and I became the president of the group pretty quickly,” Hayes said. “Those pressures have increased in the second Trump administration.”

One of the previous ERG board members had left the agency after encountering what Hayes described as “explicitly transphobic” treatment from supervisors during his gender transition. “His supervisors denied him a promotion,” and, “importantly, he did not have faith in the EEO complaint process” to see the issues with discrimination resolved, Hayes said. “And so he decided to just leave, which was, of course, such a loss for Treasury and our Employee Resource Group and all of our employees at Treasury.”

The umbrella LGBTQ ERG that Hayes led included hundreds of members across the agency, they said, and was complemented by smaller ERGs at sub-agencies like the IRS and FinCEN — several of which, Hayes said, were explicitly told to cease operations under the new administration.

Hayes did not receive any formal directive to shutter Treasury’s ERG, but described an “implicit” messaging campaign meant to shut down the group’s activities without issuing anything in writing.

“The suggestion was to stop emailing about anything related to the employee resource group, to have meetings outside of work hours, to meet off of Treasury’s campus, and things like that,” they said. “So obviously that contributes to essentially not existing functionally. Because whereas we could have previously emailed our members comfortably to announce a happy hour or a training or something like that, now they have to text each other personally to gather, which essentially makes it a defunct group.”

Internal directories scrubbed, gender-neutral restrooms removed

Hayes said the dismantling of DEI staff began almost immediately after the executive orders. Employees whose position descriptions included the terms “diversity, equity, and inclusion” were “on the chopping block,” they said. “That may differ from more statutorily mandated positions in the OMWI office or the EEO office.”

With those staff gone, so went the infrastructure that enabled ERG programming and community-building. “The people that made our employee resource group events possible were DEI staff that were fired. And so, it created an immediate chilling effect on our employee resource group, and it also, of course, put fear into a lot of our members’ hearts over whether or not we would be able to continue gathering as a community or supporting employees in a more practical way going forward. And it was just, really — it was really sad.”

Hayes described efforts to erase the ERGs from internal communication channels and databases. “They also took our information off internal websites so nobody could find us as lawyers went through the agency’s internal systems to scrub DEI language and programs,” they said.

Within a week, Hayes said, the administration had removed gender-neutral restrooms from Main Treasury, removed third-gender markers from internal databases and forms, and made it more difficult for employees with nonbinary IDs to access government buildings.

“[They] made it challenging for people with X gender markers on identification documents to access Treasury or the White House by not recognizing their gender marker on the TWAVES and WAVES forms.”

LGBTQ staff lack support and work amid a climate of isolation 

The changes have left many LGBTQ staff feeling vulnerable — not only because of diminished workplace inclusion, but due to concerns about job security amid the administration’s reductions in force (RIFs).

“Plenty of people are feeling very stressed, not only about retaining their jobs because of the layoffs and pending questions around RIFs, but then also wondering if they will be included in RIF lists because they’re being penalized somehow for being out at work,” Hayes said. “People wonder if their name will be given, not because they’re in a tranche of billets being laid off, but because of their gender identity or sexual orientation.”

In the absence of functional ERGs, Hayes said, LGBTQ employees have been cut off from even informal networks of support.

“Employees [are] feeling like it’s harder to find members of their own community because there’s no email anymore to ask when the next event is or to ask about navigating healthcare or other questions,” they said. “If there is no ERG to go to to ask for support for their specific issue, that contributes to isolation, which contributes to a worse work environment.”

Hayes said they had not interacted directly with Secretary Bessent, but they and others observed a shift from the previous administration. “It is stark to see that our first ‘out’ secretary did not host a Pride event this year,” they said. “For the last three years we’ve flown the rainbow Pride flag above Treasury during Pride. And it was such a celebration among staff and Secretary Yellen and the executive secretary’s office were super supportive.”

“Employees notice changes like that,” they added. “Things like the fact that the Secretary’s official bio says ‘spouse’ instead of ‘husband.’ It makes employees wonder if they too should be fearful of being their full selves at work.”

The Blade contacted the Treasury Department with a request for comment outlining Hayes’s allegations, including the removal of inclusive infrastructure, the discouragement of ERG activity, the pre-formalization of EEO policy changes, and the targeting of DEI personnel. As of publication, the agency has not responded.

Continue Reading

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

Popular