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

New York

Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced

One of the victims, John Umberger, was D.C. political consultant

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A New York judge on Wednesday sentenced three men convicted of killing a D.C. political consultant and another man who they targeted at gay bars in Manhattan.

NBC New York notes a jury in February convicted Jayqwan Hamilton, Jacob Barroso, and Robert DeMaio of murder, robbery, and conspiracy in relation to druggings and robberies that targeted gay bars in Manhattan from March 2021 to June 2022.

John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant from D.C., and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, died. Prosecutors said Hamilton, Barroso, and DeMaio targeted three other men at gay bars.

The jury convicted Hamilton and DeMaio of murdering Umberger. State Supreme Court Judge Felicia Mennin sentenced Hamilton and DeMaio to 40 years to life in prison.

Barroso, who was convicted of killing Ramirez, received a 20 years to life sentence.

Continue Reading

National

Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information

Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources

Published

on

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is named as a defendant in the lawsuit. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.

The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.

“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.

 “These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.

It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”

 The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question. 

A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit. 

While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management. 

The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.

 Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.   

“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.

 “Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says. 

Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”

 Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”

Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.

 “As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from  the Washington Blade. 

“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said. 

The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”

It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”

The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society. 

The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections

Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent

Published

on

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Screen capture: YouTube)

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.

The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.

While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”

“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.

The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.

Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.

Continue Reading

Popular