Connect with us

Opinions

Supreme Court considers taking marriage cases

‘We are better people than what these laws represent’

Published

on

movement, gay news, Washington Blade
mass wedding, same-sex marriage, gay marriage, Supreme Court, Proposition 8, Defense of Marriage Act, Prop 8, DOMA, gay news, LGBT, Washington Blade, marriage equality

(Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The United States Supreme Court is scheduled to discuss seven petitions from five different states today urging the Court to decide the constitutionality of state laws excluding same-sex couples from marriage on a nationwide basis. The Supreme Court has complete discretion over whether or not to take a case. And no one knows if the Court will decide whether to take any of the cases at this time or defer its decision until a future conference this fall. Indeed, the Court will have a lot to cover at its first conference with 53 petitions in other cases on its schedule as well. However, we could learn possibly as early as Tuesday whether the Court will take up the issue of the freedom to marry nationwide this term, with a substantive, definitive decision likely in June 2015.

The momentum toward marriage equality in the courts has accelerated at breakneck speed in the just over a year since the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in United States v. Windsor invalidated Section 3 of the misnamed “Defense of Marriage Act,” a statute that prohibited the federal government from recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples validly performed in states with marriage equality. Since Windsor, 27 federal courts have found state bans to be unconstitutional, with only one lower federal court upholding such a ban. Significantly, all four federal appellate decisions, from which the seven petitions to the Supreme Court come, favor equality. Judges ruling for the freedom to marry include appointees of Presidents Carter, Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Clinton, G.W. Bush and Obama. Federal District Judge Richard Young of Indiana described in his ruling the winning streak as a phenomenon “never” before “witnessed … throughout the federal court system ….” Similarly, 13 state courts have ruled in favor of marriage equality, with only one opposed.

The petitions before the Supreme Court arise out of federal appeals court decisions striking down five states’ marriage bans: Indiana (7th Circuit), Oklahoma (10th Circuit), Utah (10th Circuit), Virginia (4th Circuit), and Wisconsin (7th Circuit). All of the cases present the issue of whether or not a state may prohibit same-sex couples from marrying. However, the cases differ as well, and the justices likely will be considering these differences in determining which case or cases to take. Attorneys for same-sex couples in each of the cases have argued the particular circumstances of their individual cases make them desirable for review.

One difference in the cases is that the Oklahoma case raises only the issue of whether a state may ban same-sex couples from marrying under its state laws, while the other states’ cases also involve challenges to whether a state must recognize the marriages of same-sex couples validly married in other states. If the Supreme Court were to strike down state marriage bans nationwide, the Court would not need to decide if and when one state must recognize marriages performed in other states. Alternatively, if the Court declined to decide the issue nationwide or upheld state marriage bans, the issue of recognition of out of state marriages could be very important.

The various states’ laws at issue in the petitions also differ. For instance, Wisconsin permits same-sex couples to enter into domestic partnerships, affording them limited legal rights, while the other states with petitions before the Court do not. The wording of the marriage bans and the history of the political campaigns to pass them vary from state to state. Procedural histories of the cases differ as well. For instance, in Virginia, the Attorney General, representing the state defendant agrees that the ban is unconstitutional, and local county clerks are defending the state ban. In the other states, the state has uniformly defended the bans. The attorneys in each case differ, too, and include lawyers from groups who have been advocating for LGBT equality for decades, such as the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, and the ALCU.

The legal bases for striking down the bans also differ between the various federal appellate decisions before the Court. The appellate courts in the Oklahoma, Utah, and Virginia cases invalidated those state bans on the grounds that that they violated same-sex couples’ “fundamental right to marry,” while the appellate court in the Indiana and Wisconsin cases struck down those states’ bans on the grounds that laws that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation are entitled to elevated scrutiny under the Constitution. Windsor held that DOMA violated the Constitution’s guarantees of both liberty and equality. Both issues, and very possibly whether the bans constitute unlawful sex discrimination, will doubtlessly be argued before the Court regardless of which case or cases it takes. However, the Justices may consider the logic or rationale of one or more of the appellate court decisions particularly useful for review.

Two additional federal appellate circuits will likely weigh in this fall as well. The Sixth Circuit heard cases arising out of marriage bans in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee in early August, and the Ninth Circuit heard cases from Idaho and Nevada in early September. From relevant circuit court precedent and the questions and comments the judges made at oral argument, most observers believe the Ninth Circuit will very likely rule in favor of equality, but the outcome of the Sixth Circuit cases is much harder to predict.

In remarks last week at the University of Minnesota, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg fueled speculation that the Court might wait to determine whether or not to take a case until the Sixth Circuit rules. She stated that there would be “no need for [the Supreme Court] to rush” if the Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of the freedom to marry, as all the other circuits who have addressed the issue since Windsor have. However, she said that a Sixth Circuit ruling against equality would create “some urgency” for the Court to step in. The Supreme Court often takes cases to resolve disputes among the circuits.

Further, the Supreme Court will take a case if four of the nine justices vote to hear it. The Supreme Court has stayed decisions in the Fourth, Seventh, and Tenth Circuits from taking effect until final resolution of the cases. If the Sixth and Ninth Circuits were also to rule in favor of equality, most observers believe it unlikely that the four justices who dissented in Windsor would simply let all the petitions be dismissed by voting to deny review — effectively permitting marriage equality in 20 additional states located in those circuits. But if the Supreme Court held the petitions until a circuit court ruled against the freedom to marry, many thousands of LGBT Americans could have to wait even longer for a decision. Regardless of how the Sixth Circuit rules, the issue of marriage equality is, in fact, “urgent,” for LGBT Americans, many of whom have been together for decades without legal recognition and protection.

Many of us would love to be a proverbial “fly on the wall” at the justices’ conference chamber, but we will of course have to wait until the Court makes public its decisions from the conference either later this week or on Oct. 6, the official beginning of the new term. Federal District Judge John E. Jones III, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in his opinion, invalidating Pennsylvania’s marriage ban: “We are better people than what these laws represent, and it is time to discard them into the ash heap of history.” That time cannot come too soon.

John Lewis is legal and policy director for Marriage Equality USA.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Trump’s ‘American people derangement syndrome’

Voters must stop him before he destroys democracy

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Trump, in a deranged, evil, post on X, accused Rob Reiner of suffering from “Trump derangement syndrome.” I guess that would apply to everyone who thinks Trump is an evil, dangerous, asshole who is trying to destroy our society as we know it. With that definition, I would surmise the felon himself suffers from “American people derangement syndrome,” because clearly, he thinks we are all evil, dumb, assholes, and a danger to him, and the fascists surrounding him. 

His speech to the nation was called bellicose, by the New York Times. I would call it unhinged and vile. It was a plea to the populace, containing a pack of lies, to continue to believe his lies, and distortions. We all know the felon is full of shit when telling us prices have come down. We go shopping every week to feed ourselves and our families, even if he doesn’t. We have to pay heating and rent bills each month. We know since he became president nearly a year ago, all those costs have gone up. Talk to any honest person at a chamber of commerce in your area, and they will tell you small businesses are suffering. They will tell you the felon’s tariffs are hurting everyone. We know he is screwing the poor and middle class; trying to end SNAP benefits, and refusing to help with healthcare costs. All the while giving tax breaks to corporations, and the rich. People are not dumb Mr. Felon, and your lies are no longer resonating. 

The evil, deranged, felon in the White House lives in a world where he can do favors for his friends in return for getting them to donate hundreds of millions for his follies. He is a grifter who hosts dinners for rich people to make money for his crypto business. He is said to have made more than $3 billon since his election. This while farmers are going broke, and losing their farms, because his tariffs screwed them. He is undermining vaccines and caused a measles epidemic in the United States. This a disease eradicated before he came into office. He ended grants to research cures for HIV/AIDS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, cancer, and an assortment of childhood diseases. He stopped research grants for mRNA vaccines. When we have the next pandemic, and it will come, that will result in millions of deaths, all on his head. 

He is embarrassing the United States around the world. They watch him give unhinged speeches, raise and lower tariffs irrationally, screw our allies, and now trying to interfere in their elections. He is bombing fishing boats, claiming they are carrying drugs, with no proof at all. Then he releases from prison the man who brought more cocaine into the country than anyone else ever did. All this is what the lying, cheating, grifting, evil, heartless, felon in the White House, is doing to you, the good people of the United States, and the world. He sounds more unhinged every day while trying to blame everything on former President Biden and Democrats, who haven’t controlled the levers of government in nearly a year. 

I know the results of the 2025 elections must scare him. They show him the majority no longer accept his BS. We will go into 2026, and the midterm elections, with our eyes wide open. He wants to be King and we don’t want kings in our country. He has what his chief of staff calls, “an alcoholic’s personality” “because he believes there’s nothing he can’t do.” She is right about that, but we will call him on it in the next election. We will say clearly, with our voices, and our votes, “no more, enough is enough.” We are taking back the country and will throw out anyone in office who still supports him. 

We try and forgive those who voted for him, as long as they now recognize he lied to them, and is screwing them. Young people must understand they will suffer their whole lives because he is a climate denier. Latino and Hispanic voters, who believed he was going to support them, now see he wants to deport them. Farmers who once thought he supported them, until he screwed them. We must now all join together, and show the evil SOB in the White House, who is building his grand ballroom, taking planes, and other gifts, and pardoning the guilty; his time is coming to an end. Again, we will go into the voting booth, eyes wide open, and vote to stop him before he completely destroys our lives, our families, our democracy, and brings fascism to our country. 


Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Using movement to boost your mental health during holidays

Sometimes the goal is simply steadiness

Published

on

Gerard Burley, also known as Coach G, is founder and CEO of Sweat DC.

We’re told this is the season of Ho Ho Ho. Joy. Family. Home.

But let’s be honest. The holidays are stressful for almost everyone. Even in the best situations, this time of year comes with pressure. Expectations. Family dynamics. Financial stress. Comparison. The emotional labor of trying to make everything feel warm and magical while quietly holding a lot inside.

For some people, home is comfort. For others, it’s complicated. A place where old roles come back fast. Where you’re expected to be a version of yourself that no longer fits. Where love exists, but understanding feels incomplete.

And for many of us in the LGBTQ community, that stress can carry extra weight. Sitting at tables where parts of who you are feel debated instead of celebrated. Navigating politics and beliefs that don’t feel abstract, but personal. Deciding when to speak up, when to stay quiet, and when to just go refill your drink. Grief changes how the holidays land.

For me, the holidays have often been quiet. I’m deeply grateful for the family I still have and the support they’ve given me, and I also need to be real. I’ve been jealous. Jealous AF. Jealous that I can’t go home and hug my mother. Jealous that my dad isn’t there. Jealous when I see the cozy movie version of the holidays play out in other people’s lives. Not because they don’t deserve it, but because I wish I had it too.

Long before fitness became my career, the gym was my sanctuary. Without movement, these seasons would have been much harder. My body changed as a byproduct, sure, but what movement gave me first was something more important. Stability. A place to put grief. A way to move stress out of my body when words weren’t enough. Stress doesn’t just live in the mind.

We like to think stress is something we can talk through or think our way out of. But stress and anxiety live in the body. Chronic stress has been shown to disrupt sleep, weaken the immune system, and show up physically as tension, fatigue, and pain. When it’s left unaddressed, it doesn’t just affect how we feel emotionally. It affects how we function.

Most people don’t come into fitness because they’re thriving. After 20 years of coaching, almost everyone I’ve met started with physical goals. Lose weight. Build muscle. Look different. What they don’t always see is how stress, burnout, emotional eating, and putting everyone else first got them there. Most people aren’t failing. They’re exhausted.

When we talk about mental health, we think about therapy, medication, boundaries, vacations, or staying away from that one family member who always finds a way to press your buttons. All of those things matter. They save lives. But movement is rarely treated as part of the mental health plan, even though every single person who moves consistently feels better mentally. Not perfect. Just better. As my business partner Chase likes to say, sexy is the side effect. This isn’t just empathy. It’s a strategy.

The holidays don’t sneak up on us. We know which dinners will be hard. We know which brunches will test our patience. We know which days we’ll feel alone. So instead of raw-dogging our way through it, we can prep for it.

First, plan your movement the same way you plan the hard stuff. If you know a dinner is going to be stressful, don’t show up already hot. Schedule your workout that day, the day before, or in the days leading up so your nervous system is already in a better place. You’re not trying to win the day. You’re trying to lower the starting line.

Second, give yourself time limits. You don’t have to do the full four hours. There’s a lot of space between not showing up at all and staying until you’re emotionally fried. Do an hour. Schedule a fake work meeting if you have to. Show up in a way that lets you stay in character and protect your peace. That still counts.

Third, move how you can move. If you’re traveling, alone, out of routine, or your gym is closed, it doesn’t have to be perfect. Twenty minutes works. A walk works. A jog works. A short breathing or meditation session works. Even a quick bodyweight circuit in your childhood bedroom works. And if you need ideas, we share our monthly programming and workouts on the SWEAT DC Instagram so anyone can follow along and move, wherever they are.

Fitness doesn’t have to look good to be effective. It just has to be intentional. Especially this time of year.

As the year comes to a close, my hope isn’t that this season suddenly feels easy. It’s that you feel supported. That you remember movement isn’t about punishment or perfection. It’s about care.

Sometimes the goal isn’t happiness. Sometimes the goal is steadiness. And honestly, some years, that’s a win. We can do that. And we don’t have to do it alone.


Gerard Burley, also known as Coach G, is founder and CEO of Sweat DC.

Continue Reading

Commentary

Protecting the trans community is not optional for elected allies and candidates

One of oldest political tactics is blaming vulnerable group for societal woes

Published

on

rotester stands outside Children's National Hospital in Northwest D.C. on Feb. 2, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Linus Berggren)

Being an ally to the trans community is not a conditional position for me, nor should it be for any candidate. My allyship doesn’t hinge on polling, focus groups, or whether courage feels politically convenient. At a time when trans people, especially trans youth of color, are under coordinated attack, elected officials and candidates must do more than offer quiet support. We must take a public and solid stand.

History shows us how these moments begin. One of the oldest political tactics is to single out the most vulnerable and blame them for society’s anxieties — not because they are responsible, but because they are easier to blame than those with power and protection. In Nazi Germany, Jewish people were primarily targeted, but they were not the only demographic who suffered elimination. LGBTQ people, disabled people, Romani communities, political dissidents, and others were also rounded up, imprisoned, and killed. Among the earliest acts of fascistic repression was the destruction of Berlin’s Institute for Sexual Science, a pioneering center for gender-affirming care and LGBTQ research. These books and medical records were among the first to be confiscated and burned. It is not a coincidence that these same communities are now the first to suffer under this regime, they are our canaries in the coal mine signaling what’s to come. 

Congress, emboldened by the rhetoric of the Donald Trump campaign, recently passed HR 3492 to criminalize healthcare workers who provide gender-affirming healthcare with fines and imprisonment. This bill, sponsored by celebrity politicians like Marjorie Taylor Greene, puts politics and headlines over people and health outcomes. Healthcare that a number of cis-gendered people also benefit from byway of hair regeneration and surgery, male and female breast augmentation, hormone replacement therapy etc. Even when these bills targeting this care do not pass, they do real damage. They create fear among patients, legal uncertainty for providers, and instability for clinics that serve the most marginalized people in our communities.

Here in D.C., organizations like Planned Parenthood and Whitman-Walker Health are lifelines for many communities. They provide gender-affirming care alongside primary care, mental health services, HIV treatment, and preventative medicine. When healthcare is politicized or criminalized, people don’t wait for court rulings — they delay care, ration medication, or disappear from the system entirely.

As a pharmacist, I know exactly what that means. These are life-saving medications. Continuity of care matters. Criminalizing and politicizing healthcare does not protect children or families — it puts lives at risk.

Instead of centering these realities, political discourse has been deliberately diverted toward a manufactured panic about trans women in sports. Let me be clear: trans women deserve to be protected and allowed to compete just like anyone else. Athletics have always included people with different bodies, strengths, and abilities. Girls and women will always encounter competitors who are stronger or faster — that is not a gender or sports crisis, it is the nature of competition.

Sports are meant to teach fairness, mutual respect, and the shared spirit of competition — not suspicion or exclusion. We should not police young people’s bodies, and we should reject attempts to single out trans youth as a political distraction. Families and doctors should be the authority on sex and gender identity.

This narrative has been cynically amplified by the right, but too often Democrats have allowed it to take hold rather than forcefully rejecting it. It is imperative to pay attention to what is happening — and to push back against every attempt to dehumanize anyone for political gain.

Trans people have always been part of our communities and our democracy. Protecting the most vulnerable is not radical — it is the foundation of a just society. My work is grounded in that commitment, and I will not waver from it. I’m proud to have hired trans political team Down Ballot to lead my campaign for DC Council At Large. We need more ally leaders of all stages to stand up for the LGBTQ+ community. We must let elected detractors know that when they come for them, then they come for all of us. We cannot allow Fox News and social media trolls to create a narrative that scares us away from protecting marginalized populations. We must stand up and do what’s right.

Anything less is not leadership.

Rep. Oye Owolewa is running for an at-large seat on the D.C. Council.

Continue Reading

Popular