Connect with us

homepage news

Attorneys general seek marriage decision from Supreme Court

32 states seek final answer from justices on right for same-sex couples to wed



Martha Coakley, Kathleen Kane, Doug Gansler, John Suthers, gay news, Washington Blade

Attorneys General Martha Coakley (D-Mass), Kathleen Kane (D-Pa.), Doug Gansler (D-Md.) and John Suthers (R-Colo.) are calling on the Supreme Court to take up a marriage case. (Photos of Kane and Suthers public domain; photo of Coakley by Fogster courtesy Wikimedia Commons; photo of Gansler by Greenhouseoutgasser courtesy Wikimedia Commons)

State attorneys general offered on Thursday differing arguments for why the Supreme Court should issue a nationwide decision on the constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry — although these officials held the same view justices should make a final ruling on the issue.

In one friend-of-court brief, a set of 15 attorneys general say the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals was correct in overturning Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage, arguing the Supreme Court should make that standard apply across the country.

But in a separate filing, another set of 14 attorneys general maintain the Supreme Court should deliver a final answer on the issue, but make no explicit statement on whether justices should uphold bans on gay nuptials.

The brief in support of marriage equality argues for a nationwide standard, because, among other reasons, legal uncertainties as a result of some jurisdictions not recognizing the unions of married same-sex couples.

“A spouse in a same-sex marriage may turn down a new job or a promotion if it requires a transfer to a state that does not recognize his or her marriage,” the brief states. “Same-sex spouses may decline to pursue educational opportunities for the same reason. In other circumstances, a sick parent or relative may require care in another State, but concern for loss of marital status and its attendant rights may dissuade individuals from relocating, potentially placing greater stress on other relatives or burdening the family’s financial resources.”

The brief was signed by attorneys general in Massachusetts, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Washington State.

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, who’s running for governor in her state, is credited with the leading the effort among state attorneys general seeking a nationwide ruling for marriage equality.

“Our experience in Massachusetts clearly shows that allowing same-sex couples to marry has only benefitted families and strengthened the institution of marriage,” Coakley said in a statement. “We urge the U.S. Supreme Court to take up this important civil rights issue and ensure equal access to marriage for all couples nationwide.”

The other brief was submitted by states that lack marriage equality, but doesn’t explicitly make a statement on the constitutionality of bans on same-sex marriage.

Instead, the brief makes the case that the Supreme Court should take up the marriage issue because litigation seeking marriage equality is burdening the states. For example, the filling says, clerks have raised legal questions by distributing marriage licenses in states without marriage equality, and numerous court orders have complicated administration in these states.

“Absent this Court taking up the issue, these types of conflict will likely continue to play out in the pending same-sex marriage cases,” the brief says. “Far better than allowing this discord to be aired from court-to-court across the country, this Court can swiftly resolve the legal disputeand thereby take control of the conflict.”

But the brief isn’t completely free of language in opposition to marriage equality. At one point, it says federal involvement on the issue “raises the prospect of a new federal constitutional limit on State marriage laws” and argues litigation is hampering the democratic process for states considering the marriage issue.

The brief was signed by attorneys general in Colorado, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, who filed a lawsuit against Boulder Clerk and Recorder Hillary Hall for distributing marriage licenses to gay couples, is credited with the being the lead on this brief.

These friend-of-the-court briefs join petitions already filed before the court by Utah, Virginia and Oklahoma, which appeal decisions overturning same-sex marriage bans in those states (although technically the Oklahoma brief was filed by Alliance Defending Freedom on behalf of the Tulsa Court Clerk, not the state). Altogether, a total of 32 states have now called on the Supreme Court to make a final determination on the marriage issue.

Attorneys general that didn’t sign either brief serve in Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Wyoming, Nevada, Ohio as well as D.C.

The Supreme Court will have an opportunity to decide whether it’ll take up one of the marriage cases during its first conference of the upcoming term on September 29. Justices may decide to choose a case then, or wait until a subsequent conference to make a determination.

Briefs from the attorneys general were filed alongside a bevy of other friend-of-the-court briefs calling on the Supreme Court to settle the marriage issue. Another prominent brief filed by 30 employers — including Target, Nike,, eBay and Bloomberg LP — calls for the Supreme Court to issue a nationwide ruling in favor of marriage equality.

Other briefs seeking a ruling upholding bans on same-sex marriage were filed by the conservative group known as Judicial Watch as well as religious groups, including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Church of Latter-Day Saints.

Continue Reading


  1. Skeeter Sanders

    September 6, 2014 at 2:02 am

    I can cite another reason why the Supreme Court must ultimately decide the issue of whether gay and lesbian couples in all 50 states have the legal and constitutional right to marry.

    That reason — aside form the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment — is Article IV of the U.S. Constitution:

    Section 1: “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”

    Section 2: “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”

    While there is no chance that Congress, given its current partisan division, will act on the matter, it is Section 2 of Article IV — the Entitlement Clause — that is the most relevant section.
    Gay and lesbian couples who live in those states where same-sex marriage is banned but who marry in a state where it is legal are constitutionally entitled to have their marriages recognized by their home state.

  2. Grant MacDonald

    September 7, 2014 at 2:25 am

    The bible and the torah should be banned!

    Here are several really loving excerpts from the Torah; the first five books of the Old Testament in the bible — perhaps read to the congregation on Friday night at a synagogue or a Sunday morning church in the meadow.

    1. Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. Deuteronomy 13:6-10
    2. Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16
    3. Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7.

    Rabbinical / Priestly rules: Leviticus 21:17-18 … “No one who is blind or lame or has a defect or any blemish may approach to offer the bread of his God.” Leviticus 18:22 … “You are not to go to bed with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

    The pope and churches fully aware that Leviticus 18:22 applies to rabbis and priests … refuse to remove this stigma maliciously persecuting gays. Kids are being bullied into suicide …!

    Being left-handed … black or being gay is just as natural. It is a sometimes rare occurrence to fall in Love and to hold that person in your heart and be loved in return … it is something that should be celebrated! If it’s between two guys or two girls — all the better. It takes even more courage to defend that LOVE!

    It’s now time to shut down the synagogues and churches with the torah & bibles with Leviticus 18:22 and Deuteronomy 13:12-16. To see the religious lunatics manipulate government and peoples’ lives — is shameful.

    Many theologians state quite correctly that the birth; crucifixion; resurrection and other elements of christianity actually didn’t even happen! Churches are committing hate crimes and more succinctly a violent criminal offence against a federally protected minority namely the gay community. It is actually a bigger moment in history … gays standing up for equality … the realization that there is something far more evil at work — hateful religion which should be discharged from society – period.

    Religion and the churches should now be exposed as a bigoted structure that gets away with hate mongering. It is a criminal offence to cause harm onto others physically or with written items; torahs – old testament/new testament bibles have been getting away with corruption and cultism based on bogus hocus pocus.

    There is no scientific evidence to prove any of the cross related bogus elements of christianity and other religions. Our early human ancestors; on this earth … go back more than 6 million years … 5,996,000 years before the Greeks, Romans and the Jews. Christianity is basically a 2014 year old fictional cult. In the year 300 AD when Emperor Constantine, who to some was the first pope; went on to fabricate & market Christianity! Christianity is a fantasy; which turned out to be one of the most hateful & evil concoctions ever perpetrated on the world.

    It is written; so therefore it shall be? We are the chosen people; such a wicked fantasy.

    Einstein stated in a letter recently auctioned that the bible was a collection of primitive legends. He said believing in God was childish and he as a Jew is no different than another person and are not chosen by God.

  3. Huy Tu

    September 7, 2014 at 5:11 pm

    Religions are not just the opium of the mass, it's their curse. "Faith is believing something you know ain't true." – Mark Twain

  4. Thom Boone

    September 7, 2014 at 5:16 pm

    Kudos to our Attorney Generals! Particularly Doug Gansler. It is no secret that I believe Doug Gansler is one of the greatest Attorney Generals ever. I am gratified to see Doug at the forefront of leadership of this group. The Supreme Court of the U.S. has done nothing but run away from ANY question relating to the equality and the rights of GLBT people for my entire life (60 years now). The few decisions they have made with respect to GLBT rights invariably have been tangential to addressing the overall issue at hand: in short, the Supremes have been truly "chicken sh*t" about accepting any case that involves anything remotely related to addressing the issue of the rights of GLBT people (whether it is to serve the nation in the military, to ensure equal protection under the law against acts of hate, or to uphold the obvious right of each and ever GLBT person to marry whomever s(he) choses. For example, has anyone even asked the traditional male-female heterosexual married couple "WHO VOTED FOR YOUR MARRIAGE ANYWAY?" Of course not. The blatant and destructive harm done to the GLBT community by acceptance of a wholly prejudicial and egregiously biased standard of what constitutes marriage under the Constitutional law of the United States is fundamentally irreparable. The pschological damage done to an entire class pf real human beings by avoiding dealing with the issue – because it is a "hot potato" – will not disappear when the Supremes finall do act – and really – in the interest of due process, equality under the law, and sanity – when the Supremes finally do address the issue head-on, there is only one ruling they can make and maintain stare decisis. If the Supreme Court fails to extend the right – at least in so far as requiring all states to recognize and honor marriages performed in states where GLBT marriage has been legalized (which at this point represents half the population), the Supremes will set a legal precedent which will undermine more than a Century-and-a-half's worth of jurisprudence based on "due process". There really isn't a lot of wiggle room here. Despite what some fast-talking shysters from the very loud mouthed extremist fundamentalist Christian right which for far too long has been allowed to impose their very rigid, very limited, and extremely bigotted value system upon the whole of U.S. society. Little boys and little girls are socialized at a very early age to buy into the equivalent of the Ozzie and Harriet myth of what constitutes marriage, family, and a social norm – which simply is at fundamental odds with the real composition of America (not just today, but 50 years ago for sure too and no doubt dating back time immemorial (the difference being marked by the 1969 Stonewall riots, where for the first time gays began to stand up for their human rights and refuse to live under such intolerable oppression (which viewpoint denies their very right to exist let alone to co-exist equally). Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler early on saw this and did his homework; he reviewed all of the decisions relating to the mysogny laws (the laws governing interrracial marriage) and the ultimate holding of the U.S. Supreme Court that all states must recognize a marriage performed in another state based on equality under the law, due process, and provisions in the Fair Faith and Credit Act). The parallel analogy to GLBT marriage is obvious. If the Supremes – who have the right to refuse to hear any case and so far have done their best to run away from making the ruling which is the only fair and just rulint they can make without setting a precedent which in theory at least could undo much of the Frederal government (as even the income tax and the right to create Executive Agencies derives from the expansion of the interpretation of the words "due process", not just "one man/one vote", and all of the other human rights advances even women's suffrage (which still required a separate Amendment for clarification), right up to Brown versus Ferguson, the Civil Rights Acts, and the expansion of the military-industrial complex, virtually all powers assumed to by the federal government even though not specifically enumerated based on the concept of "due process"). The likelihood that even Clarence Thomas whose opinions are generally regarded as being on the verge of Draconian and never asks any questions would set a precedent that risks undoing all the progress made over more than the past Century on all these fronts is extremely low. Hence, the inescapable conclusion that the only decision the Supremes can render in good faith is to extend the recognition of gay marriage to all 50 states – which is equivalent on its face to overturning an and all laws prhoibiting GLBT marriage and to creating a uniform Federal standard which will supercede all State laws. In all likelihood, all states will conform to the Federal standard by passing marriage equality or by judicial decree prior to such a decision from the Supremes. If the scenario I have just outlined – which Attorney General Doug Gansler, one of the finest public servants and most brilliant legal minds the country has ever seen, whom Equality Marland truly, truly ought to be ashamed of itself for failing to back in his bid for Governor earlier this year (Equality Maryland's decision was also "chicken sh*t" and given that the GLBT community hardly represents or ever represented AG Doug Gansler's constituency)),

    The GLBT Maryland community really ought to have understood that Gansler owed them nothing; his motivation for doing the homework and thinking this entire argument through – which is in fact the best legal argument advanced, one that is certain to win – was driven by his public service orientation and values gyroscope which derives from his core personal value sysem deeply rooted in the spirit of the meaning of the word "justice" (not crossing all the "t's" and dotting all the 'i's".

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

homepage news

Equality Act, contorted as a danger by anti-LGBTQ forces, is all but dead

No political willpower to force vote or reach a compromise



Despite having President Biden in the White House and Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, efforts to update federal civil rights laws to strengthen the prohibition on discrimination against LGBTQ people by passing the Equality Act are all but dead as opponents of the measure have contorted it beyond recognition.

Political willpower is lacking to find a compromise that would be acceptable to enough Republican senators to end a filibuster on the bill — a tall order in any event — nor is there the willpower to force a vote on the Equality Act as opponents stoke fears about transgender kids in sports and not even unanimity in the Democratic caucus in favor of the bill is present, stakeholders who spoke to the Blade on condition of anonymity said.

In fact, there are no imminent plans to hold a vote on the legislation even though Pride month is days away, which would be an opportune time for Congress to demonstrate solidarity with the LGBTQ community by holding a vote on the legislation.

If the Equality Act were to come up for a Senate vote in the next month, it would not have the support to pass. Continued assurances that bipartisan talks are continuing on the legislation have yielded no evidence of additional support, let alone the 10 Republicans needed to end a filibuster.

“I haven’t really heard an update either way, which is usually not good,” one Democratic insider said. “My understanding is that our side was entrenched in a no-compromise mindset and with [Sen. Joe] Manchin saying he didn’t like the bill, it doomed it this Congress. And the bullying of hundreds of trans athletes derailed our message and our arguments of why it was broadly needed.”

The only thing keeping the final nail from being hammered into the Equality Act’s coffin is the unwillingness of its supporters to admit defeat. Other stakeholders who spoke to the Blade continued to assert bipartisan talks are ongoing, strongly pushing back on any conclusion the legislation is dead.

Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said the Equality Act is “alive and well,” citing widespread public support he said includes “the majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents and a growing number of communities across the country engaging and mobilizing every day in support of the legislation.”

“They understand the urgent need to pass this bill and stand up for LGBTQ people across our country,” David added. “As we engage with elected officials, we have confidence that Congress will listen to the voices of their constituents and continue fighting for the Equality Act through the lengthy legislative process.  We will also continue our unprecedented campaign to grow the already-high public support for a popular bill that will save lives and make our country fairer and more equal for all. We will not stop until the Equality Act is passed.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), chief sponsor of the Equality Act in the Senate, also signaled through a spokesperson work continues on the legislation, refusing to give up on expectations the legislation would soon become law.

“Sen. Merkley and his staff are in active discussions with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to try to get this done,” McLennan said. “We definitely see it as a key priority that we expect to become law.”

A spokesperson Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who had promised to force a vote on the Equality Act in the Senate on the day the U.S. House approved it earlier this year, pointed to a March 25 “Dear Colleague” letter in which he identified the Equality Act as one of several bills he’d bring up for a vote.

Despite any assurances, the hold up on the bill is apparent. Although the U.S. House approved the legislation earlier this year, the Senate Judiciary Committee hasn’t even reported out the bill yet to the floor in the aftermath of the first-ever Senate hearing on the bill in March. A Senate Judiciary Committee Democratic aide, however, disputed that inaction as evidence the Equality Act is dead in its tracks: “Bipartisan efforts on a path forward are ongoing.”

Democrats are quick to blame Republicans for inaction on the Equality Act, but with Manchin withholding his support for the legislation they can’t even count on the entirety of their caucus to vote “yes” if it came to the floor. Progressives continue to advocate an end to the filibuster to advance legislation Biden has promised as part of his agenda, but even if they were to overcome headwinds and dismantle the institution needing 60 votes to advance legislation, the Equality Act would likely not have majority support to win approval in the Senate with a 50-50 party split.

The office of Manchin, who has previously said he couldn’t support the Equality Act over concerns about public schools having to implement the transgender protections applying to sports and bathrooms, hasn’t responded to multiple requests this year from the Blade on the legislation and didn’t respond to a request to comment for this article.

Meanwhile, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who declined to co-sponsor the Equality Act this year after having signed onto the legislation in the previous Congress, insisted through a spokesperson talks are still happening across the aisle despite the appearances the legislation is dead.

“There continues to be bipartisan support for passing a law that protects the civil rights of Americans, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity,” said Annie Clark, a Collins spokesperson. “The Equality Act was a starting point for negotiations, and in its current form, it cannot pass. That’s why there are ongoing discussions among senators and stakeholders about a path forward.”

Let’s face it: Anti-LGBTQ forces have railroaded the debate by making the Equality Act about an end to women’s sports by allowing transgender athletes and danger to women in sex-segregated places like bathrooms and prisons. That doesn’t even get into resolving the issue on drawing the line between civil rights for LGBTQ people and religious freedom, which continues to be litigated in the courts as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected any day now to issue a ruling in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia to determine if foster care agencies can reject same-sex couples over religious objections.

For transgender Americans, who continue to report discrimination and violence at high rates, the absence of the Equality Act may be most keenly felt.

Mara Keisling, outgoing executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, disputed any notion the Equality Act is dead and insisted the legislation is “very much alive.”

“We remain optimistic despite misinformation from the opposition,” Keisling said. “NCTE and our movement partners are still working fruitfully on the Equality Act with senators. In fact, we are gaining momentum with all the field organizing we’re doing, like phone banking constituents to call their senators. Legislating takes time. Nothing ever gets through Congress quickly. We expect to see a vote during this Congress, and we are hopeful we can win.”

But one Democratic source said calls to members of Congress against the Equality Act, apparently coordinated by groups like the Heritage Foundation, have has outnumbered calls in favor of it by a substantial margin, with a particular emphasis on Manchin.

No stories are present in the media about same-sex couples being kicked out of a restaurant for holding hands or transgender people for using the restroom consistent with their gender identity, which would be perfectly legal in 25 states thanks to the patchwork of civil rights laws throughout the United States and inadequate protections under federal law.

Tyler Deaton, senior adviser for the American Unity Fund, which has bolstered the Republican-led Fairness for All Act as an alternative to the Equality Act, said he continues to believe the votes are present for a compromise form of the bill.

“I know for a fact there is a supermajority level of support in the Senate for a version of the Equality Act that is fully protective of both LGBTQ civil rights and religious freedom,” Deaton said. “There is interest on both sides of the aisle in getting something done this Congress.”

Deaton, however, didn’t respond to a follow-up inquiry on what evidence exists of agreeing on this compromise.

Biden has already missed the goal he campaigned on in the 2020 election to sign the Equality Act into law within his first 100 days in office. Although Biden renewed his call to pass the legislation in his speech to Congress last month, as things stand now that appears to be a goal he won’t realize for the remainder of this Congress.

Nor has the Biden administration made the Equality Act an issue for top officials within the administration as it pushes for an infrastructure package as a top priority. One Democratic insider said Louisa Terrell, legislative affairs director for the White House, delegated work on the Equality Act to a deputy as opposed to handling it herself.

To be sure, Biden has demonstrated support for the LGBTQ community through executive action at an unprecedented rate, signing an executive order on day one ordering federal agencies to implement the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year in Bostock v. Clayton County to the fullest extent possible and dismantling former President Trump’s transgender military ban. Biden also made historic LGBTQ appointments with the confirmation of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Rachel Levine as assistant secretary of health.

A White House spokesperson insisted Biden’s team across the board remains committed to the Equality Act, pointing to his remarks to Congress.

“President Biden has urged Congress to get the Equality Act to his desk so he can sign it into law and provide long overdue civil rights protections to LGBTQ+ Americans, and he remains committed to seeing this legislation passed as quickly as possible,” the spokesperson said. “The White House and its entire legislative team remains in ongoing and close coordination with organizations, leaders, members of Congress, including the Equality Caucus, and staff to ensure we are working across the aisle to push the Equality Act forward.”

But at least in the near-term, that progress will fall short of fulfilling the promise of updating federal civil rights law with the Equality Act, which will mean LGBTQ people won’t be able to rely on those protections when faced with discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. bill to ban LGBTQ panic defense delayed by Capitol security

Delivery of bill to Congress was held up due to protocols related to Jan. 6 riots



New fencing around the Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented some D.C. bills from being delivered to the Hill for a required congressional review. (Blade file photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A bill approved unanimously last December by the D.C. Council to ban the so-called LGBTQ panic defense has been delayed from taking effect as a city law because the fence installed around the U.S. Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented the law from being delivered to Congress.

According to Eric Salmi, communications director for D.C. Council member Charles Allen (D-Ward 6), who guided the bill through the Council’s legislative process, all bills approved by the Council and signed by the D.C. mayor must be hand-delivered to Congress for a required congressional review.

“What happened was when the Capitol fence went up after the January insurrection, it created an issue where we physically could not deliver laws to Congress per the congressional review period,” Salmi told the Washington Blade.

Among the bills that could not immediately be delivered to Congress was the Bella Evangelista and Tony Hunter Panic Defense Prohibition and Hate Crimes Response Amendment Act of 2020, which was approved by the Council on a second and final vote on Dec. 15.

Between the time the bill was signed by Mayor Muriel Bowser and published in the D.C. Register under procedural requirements for all bills, it was not ready to be transmitted to Congress until Feb. 16, the Council’s legislative record for the bill shows.

Salmi said the impasse in delivering the bill to Congress due to the security fence prevented the bill from reaching Congress on that date and prevented the mandatory 60-day congressional review period for this bill from beginning at that time. He noted that most bills require a 30 legislative day review by Congress.

But the Evangelista-Hunter bill, named after a transgender woman and a gay man who died in violent attacks by perpetrators who attempted to use the trans and gay panic defense, includes a law enforcement related provision that under the city’s Home Rule Charter passed by Congress in the early 1970s requires a 60-day congressional review.

“There is a chance it goes into effect any day now, just given the timeline is close to being up,” Salmi said on Tuesday. “I don’t know the exact date it was delivered, but I do know the countdown is on,” said Salmi, who added, “I would expect any day now it should go into effect and there’s nothing stopping it other than an insurrection in January.”

If the delivery to Congress had not been delayed, the D.C. Council’s legislative office estimated the congressional review would have been completed by May 12.

A congressional source who spoke on condition of being identified only as a senior Democratic aide, said the holdup of D.C. bills because of the Capitol fence has been corrected.

“The House found an immediate workaround, when this issue first arose after the Jan. 6 insurrection,” the aide said.

“This is yet another reason why D.C. Council bills should not be subject to a congressional review period and why we need to grant D.C. statehood,” the aide said.

The aide added that while no disapproval resolution had been introduced in Congress to overturn the D.C. Evangelista-Hunter bill, House Democrats would have defeated such a resolution.

“House Democrats support D.C. home rule, statehood, and LGBTQ rights,” said the aide.

LGBTQ rights advocates have argued that a ban on using a gay or transgender panic defense in criminal trials is needed to prevent defense attorneys from inappropriately asking juries to find that a victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression is to blame for a defendant’s criminal act, including murder.

Some attorneys have argued that their clients “panicked” after discovering the person against whom they committed a violent crime was gay or transgender, prompting them to act in a way they believed to be a form of self-defense.

In addition to its provision banning the LGBTQ panic defense, the Evangelista-Hunter bill includes a separate provision that strengthens the city’s existing hate crimes law by clarifying that hatred need not be the sole motivating factor for an underlying crime such as assault, murder, or threats to be prosecuted as a hate crime.

LGBTQ supportive prosecutors have said the clarification was needed because it is often difficult to prove to a jury that hatred is the only motive behind a violent crime. The prosecutors noted that juries have found defendants not guilty of committing a hate crime on grounds that they believed other motives were involved in a particular crime after defense lawyers argued that the law required “hate” to be the only motive in order to find someone guilty of a hate crime.

Salmi noted that while the hate crime clarification and panic defense prohibition provisions of the Evangelista-Hunter bill will become law as soon as the congressional review is completed, yet another provision in the bill will not become law after the congressional review because there are insufficient funds in the D.C. budget to cover the costs of implementing the provision.

The provision gives the D.C. Office of Human Rights and the Office of the D.C. Attorney General authority to investigate hate related discrimination at places of public accommodation. Salmi said the provision expands protections against discrimination to include web-based retailers or online delivery services that are not physically located in D.C.

“That is subject to appropriations,” Salmi said. “And until it is funded in the upcoming budget it cannot be legally enforced.”

He said that at Council member Allen’s request, the Council added language to the bill that ensures that all other provisions of the legislation that do not require additional funding – including the ban on use of the LGBTQ panic defense and the provision clarifying that hatred doesn’t have to be the sole motive for a hate crime – will take effect as soon as the congressional approval process is completed.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. man charged with 2020 anti-gay death threat rearrested

Defendant implicated in three anti-LGBTQ incidents since 2011



shooting, DC Eagle, assault, hate crime, anti-gay attack, police discrimination, sex police, Sisson, gay news, Washington Blade

A D.C. man arrested in August 2020 for allegedly threatening to kill a gay man outside the victim’s apartment in the city’s Adams Morgan neighborhood and who was released while awaiting trial was arrested again two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill another man in an unrelated incident.

D.C. Superior Court records show that Jalal Malki, who was 37 at the time of his 2020 arrest on a charge of bias-related attempts to do bodily harm against the gay man, was charged on May 4, 2021 with unlawful entry, simple assault, threats to kidnap and injure a person, and attempted possession of a prohibited weapon against the owner of a vacant house at 4412 Georgia Ave., N.W.

Court charging documents state that Malki was allegedly staying at the house without permission as a squatter. An arrest affidavit filed in court by D.C. police says Malki allegedly threatened to kill the man who owns the house shortly after the man arrived at the house while Malki was inside.

According to the affidavit, Malki walked up to the owner of the house while the owner was sitting in his car after having called police and told him, “If you come back here, I’m going to kill you.” While making that threat Malki displayed what appeared to be a gun in his waistband, but which was later found to be a toy gun, the affidavit says.

Malki then walked back inside the house minutes before police arrived and arrested him. Court records show that similar to the court proceedings following his 2020 arrest for threatening the gay man, a judge in the latest case ordered Malki released while awaiting trial. In both cases, the judge ordered him to stay away from the two men he allegedly threatened to kill.

An arrest affidavit filed by D.C. police in the 2020 case states that Malki allegedly made the threats inside an apartment building where the victim lived on the 2300 block of Champlain Street, N.W. It says Malki was living in a nearby building but often visited the building where the victim lived.

“Victim 1 continued to state during an interview that it was not the first time that Defendant 1 had made threats to him, but this time Defendant 1 stated that if he caught him outside, he would ‘fucking kill him.’” the affidavit says. It quotes the victim as saying during this time Malki repeatedly called the victim a “fucking faggot.”

The affidavit, prepared by the arresting officers, says that after the officers arrested Malki and were leading him to a police transport vehicle to be booked for the arrest, he expressed an “excited utterance” that he was “in disbelief that officers sided with the ‘fucking faggot.’”

Court records show that Malki is scheduled to appear in court on June 4 for a status hearing for both the 2020 arrest and the arrest two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill the owner of the house in which police say he was illegally squatting.

Superior Court records show that Malki had been arrested three times between 2011 and 2015 in cases unrelated to the 2021 and 2020 cases for allegedly also making threats of violence against people. Two of the cases appear to be LGBTQ related, but prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office did not list the cases as hate crimes.

In the first of the three cases, filed in July 2011, Malki allegedly shoved a man inside Dupont Circle and threatened to kill him after asking the man why he was wearing a purple shirt.

“Victim 1 believes the assault occurred because Suspect 1 believes Victim 1 is a homosexual,” the police arrest affidavit says.

Court records show prosecutors charged Malki with simple assault and threats to do bodily harm in the case. But the court records show that on Sept. 13, 2011, D.C. Superior Court Judge Stephen F. Eilperin found Malki not guilty on both charges following a non-jury trial.

The online court records do not state why the judge rendered a not guilty verdict. With the courthouse currently closed to the public and the press due to COVID-related restrictions, the Washington Blade couldn’t immediately obtain the records to determine the judge’s reason for the verdict.

In the second case, court records show Malki was arrested by D.C. police outside the Townhouse Tavern bar and restaurant at 1637 R St., N.W. on Nov. 7, 2012 for allegedly threatening one or more people with a knife after employees ordered Malki to leave the establishment for “disorderly behavior.”

At the time, the Townhouse Tavern was located next door to the gay nightclub Cobalt, which before going out of business two years ago, was located at the corner of 17th and R Streets, N.W.

The police arrest affidavit in the case says Malki allegedly pointed a knife in a threatening way at two of the tavern’s employees who blocked his path when he attempted to re-enter the tavern. The affidavit says he was initially charged by D.C. police with assault with a dangerous weapon – knife. Court records, however, show that prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office lowered the charges to two counts of simple assault. The records show that on Jan. 15, 2013, Malki pleaded guilty to the two charges as part of a plea bargain arrangement.

The records show that Judge Marissa Demeo on that same day issued a sentence of 30 days for each of the two charges but suspended all 30 days for both counts. She then sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for both charges and ordered that he undergo alcohol and drug testing and undergo treatment if appropriate.

In the third case prior to the 2020 and 2021 cases, court records show Malki was arrested outside the Cobalt gay nightclub on March 14, 2015 on multiple counts of simple assault, attempted assault with a dangerous weapon – knife, possession of a prohibited weapon – knife, and unlawful entry.

The arrest affidavit says an altercation started on the sidewalk outside the bar when for unknown reasons, Malki grabbed a female customer who was outside smoking and attempted to pull her toward him. When her female friend came to her aid, Malki allegedly got “aggressive” by threatening the woman and “removed what appeared to be a knife from an unknown location” and pointed it at the woman’s friend in a threatening way, the affidavit says.

It says a Cobalt employee minutes later ordered Malki to leave the area and he appeared to do so. But others noticed that he walked toward another entrance door to Cobalt and attempted to enter the establishment knowing he had been ordered not to return because of previous problems with his behavior, the affidavit says. When he attempted to push away another employee to force his way into Cobalt, Malki fell to the ground during a scuffle and other employees held him on the ground while someone else called D.C. police.

Court records show that similar to all of Malki’s arrests, a judge released him while awaiting trial and ordered him to stay away from Cobalt and all of those he was charged with threatening and assaulting.

The records show that on Sept. 18, 2015, Malki agreed to a plea bargain offer by prosecutors in which all except two of the charges – attempted possession of a prohibited weapon and simple assault – were dropped. Judge Alfred S. Irving Jr. on Oct. 2, 2015 sentenced Malki to 60 days of incarnation for each of the two charges but suspended all but five days, which he allowed Malki to serve on weekends, the court records show.

The judge ordered that the two five-day jail terms could be served concurrently, meaning just five days total would be served, according to court records. The records also show that Judge Irving sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for each of the two counts and ordered that he enter an alcohol treatment program and stay away from Cobalt.

Continue Reading

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts