Connect with us

News

Shaheen poised to help gay veterans on Senate floor

Charlie Morgan Act filed as amendment, but floor vote seems unlikely

Published

on

Jeanne Shaheen, United States Senate, gay news, Washington Blade, New Hampshire, Democratic Party

Jeanne Shaheen, United States Senate, gay news, Washington Blade, New Hampshire, Democratic Party

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) filed the Charlie Morgan Act as an amendment to a veterans benefits bill (Pubic domain photo).

The senior U.S. senator from New Hampshire filed an amendment on Wednesday that would ensure married same-sex couples can access spousal veterans benefits wherever the go in the country, although the measure at this time seems unlikely to see a vote.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) submitted the measure, known as the Charlie Morgan Equal Treatment Act, as a potential amendment to S.1982, a veterans benefits bill under debate this week on Senate floor.

“No one who has served openly in our military and fought for our country should be denied benefits that they’ve rightfully earned,” Shaheen said. “The Charlie Morgan Act makes sure that we fulfill the commitment we have made to all of our veterans and military families so that finally no spouse, child or family can be denied the care and benefits they deserve.”

As the Washington Blade previously reported, seven months after the Supreme Court ruling against Section 3 of Defense of the Marriage Act, the Obama administration is still not affording to veterans benefits — such as disability benefits, survivor benefits and joint burial at a veteran’s cemetery — to married same-sex couples who apply for these benefits in non-marriage equality states.

The portion of the law governing spousal benefits for veterans, 103(c) of Title 38, looks to the state the residence, not the state of celebration, to determine whether a couple is married. The Obama administration has said it’s reviewing whether it can afford these to married same-sex couples in states without marriage equality following the DOMA decision, but no announcement has been made.

The amendment is cosponsored by Sens. Mark Udall (D-Colo), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis).

Udall said in a statement the amendment ensure veterans “receive the benefits they have earned regardless of whom they love or in which state they were legally married.”

“Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision to strike down the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, legally married veterans and their families are still being cut off from the benefits they earned through their service to our nation,” Udall said.

Just because the senators filed the amendment, the measure won’t necessarily come up on the Senate floor. Senate leadership has to come to an agreement to allow the amendment to come up for a vote.

Faiz Shakir, a spokesperson for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), blamed Republicans and said at this time no amendments — including the Charlie Morgan Act — will be able to come up for a vote on the measure.

“The Republicans have been poisoning the debate by insisting that a vote on Iran sanctions be included as part of the bipartisan veterans bill,” Shakir said. “Sen. Reid has insisted that we should allow votes on relevant amendments from both sides (which the Shaheen/Udall proposal would certainly be a candidate for). But until Republicans can agree to the threshold of relevant amendments, we’re stuck in a situation where no progress on amendments can be had.”

Don Stewart, a spokesperson for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), in turn criticized Reid.

“First of all, we’re not even on the bill yet procedurally, so no amendments are in order at this time,” Stewart said. “And once we are, the expectation is that Sen. Reid will ‘fill the tree’ (which blocks ALL other amendments from being considered).

Udall has been vocal about the issue and has written at least two letters to the Obama administration urging federal officials to stop enforcing veterans law in a way that discriminates against same-sex couples.

Mike Saccone, a Udall spokesperson, said the introduction of the amendment shouldn’t be taken as a sign the senator has given up on pushing for an administrative fix to the issue.

“The administration can and should do this on its own, but until that happens Sen. Udall is going to pursue every avenue to fix this and prevent any more incidents of discrimination,” Saccone said.

The amendment is named after New Hampshire National Guard Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan, a plaintiff in the one of the federal lawsuits against the DOMA who passed away last year after a battle with breast cancer. According to Shaheen’s office, Morgan’s spouse and daughter haven’t able to receive certain survivor benefits “due to restrictions in the federal code prohibiting the VA from administering benefits.

Last year, the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs approved the Charlie Morgan Act by voice vote as part of a package of additional bills.

Allison Herwitt, vice president for government affairs at the Human Rights Campaign, was among those calling for passage of the measure.

“While we have made great progress in extending the full range of federal benefits to married lesbian and gay couples, there is still uncertainty regarding the equal recognition of all the families of the brave men and women who have served our nation in uniform,” Herwitt said. “Sen. Shaheen’s bill will honor the memory of Charlie Morgan and ensure that all veteran families get the respect and benefits they deserve.”

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