News
Gorsuch confirmed to the dismay of LGBT rights supporters
Senate approves new justice after nuking filibuster
The U.S. Senate confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court.
(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
The U.S. Senate confirmed on Friday Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court much to the dismay of LGBT rights supporters who think he’ll oppose LGBT rights and Democrats who say the seat was unfairly awarded to him.
The Senate confirmed him to the seat by a largely party-line vote of 54-45, although Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) joined Republicans to confirm the nominee. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), who’s recovering from back surgery, missed the vote.
Russell Roybal, deputy executive director for the National LGBTQ Task Force, said in a statement the confirmation amounts to “the triumph of bullying over moderation.”
“Taking their lead from the Bully-in-Chief Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell twisted and turned the rules of the Senate to ram this extremist nominee through — slashing and burning safeguards for moderation, such as the rule calling for a 60 votes threshold needed to confirm an Associate Supreme Court Justice,” Roybal said. “We now have a new Justice who is so conservative that he makes Antonin Scalia look moderate,”
The Gorsuch confirmation is a win for President Trump after a first 100 days in office marked by questions about his presidential campaign’s relationship with Russia, the failure of legislation he endorsed to repeal Obamacare and national security challenges in Syria and North Korea.
But Democrats put up a fight in the road to confirmation, citing Senate Republicans’ unwillingness to even hold a hearing for President Obama’s choice for the seat — U.S. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland — when it was first made open by the death of the U.S. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia last year.
Democrats on Thursday successfully filibustered by the nomination after speaking out on the Senate floor against Gorsuch on the Senate. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who said he’d filibuster any nominee other than Garland, spoke for 15 hours on the Senate floor against Trump’s nominee.
In the end, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was able to move forward by changing the rules and exercising the “nuclear option,” which ended the ability for senators to filibuster nominees to the Supreme Court. McConnell cited as precedent for this action former Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid ending the filibuster in 2013 for administrative appointments and lower court judicial nominees.
Commending McConnell for his actions to ensure the confirmation of Gorsuch was Tony Perkins, president of the anti-LGBT Family Research Council.
“Leader McConnell is to be commended for holding fast to historical precedent of not allowing an outgoing president to pack the Court with ideological jurists on his way out of the White House,” Perkins said. “The Supreme Court vacancy after the death of Justice Scalia became a defining issue of the 2016 presidential election. President Trump made history by telling voters who he would appoint to the Court by providing a list — the American people chose him and he in turn chose from the list, keeping his promise.”
LGBT rights supporters have expressed concerns about Gorsuch largely because of his record as a judge on the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Chief among those concerns is a ruling the Hobby Lobby case in which he determined the retail chain should afforded “religious freedom” despite requirements under Obamacare to deny contraceptive coverage for female employees. Many LGBT rights supporters say that could be a prelude to Gorsuch being willing to institute “religious freedom” carve-outs in LGBT non-discrimination laws.
Other LGBT criticism over Gorsuch relates to his decisions on transgender rights. In 2015, Gorsuch joined an 11th Circuit decision against a transgender inmate who alleged she was denied transition-related hormone therapy and unfairly housed in an all-male facility. In 2009, Gorsuch also joined an unpublished opinion finding the provision against sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 doesn’t apply to transgender people.
In a 2005 op-ed for the National Review “Liberals & Lawsuits,” Gorsuch excoriated the progressive movement for seeking advancements in the courts, identifying same-sex marriage an issue that should be decided elsewhere a decade before the Supreme Court would rule for marriage equality nationwide.
Sarah Kate Ellis, CEO of GLAAD, condemned Senate Republicans for the confirmation of Gorsuch in a statement based on his anti-LGBT rulings and writings.
“Republicans in the Senate just destroyed a steadfast American tradition for the purpose of confirming a person to the U.S. Supreme Court who will most certainly vote in opposition to the safety and well-being of the LGBTQ community and many marginalized groups for his entire career on the bench,” Ellis said. “With his history of siding against transgender Americans and arguing against marriage equality, Neil Gorsuch is yet another reprehensible pawn in the Trump Administration’s goal of erasing the LGBTQ community from the fabric of America.”
During his confirmation hearing, Gorsuch said the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage is “settled law,” but added “there is ongoing litigation about its impact and application right now,” suggesting he thinks limitations to the ruling are still on the table. According to the Human Rights Campaign, Gorsuch also refused to answer in response to written questions from the Senate whether he thinks LGBT people are eligible for protections under current federal civil rights laws.
Stan Sloan, CEO of the Family Equality Council, said in a statement he hopes concerns about Gorsuch’s views on legal protections for LGBT people prove incorrect now that the jurist has been confirmed to the Supreme Court.
“Family Equality Council opposed the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and we are disappointed that this confirmation is now a reality,” Sloan said. “We hope that our fears concerning his ability to assure fair treatment of LGBTQ individuals and families — and members of all marginalized communities — will now be proven wrong, and that Justice Gorsuch rises to support and protect the civil liberties of all Americans.”
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore on Tuesday signed a bill that decriminalizes HIV in the state.
State Dels. Kris Fair (D-Frederick County) and Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City) are among the lawmakers who sponsored House Bill 39 or the Carlton R. Smith Act, which is named after the long-time activist known as the “mayor” of Baltimore’s Mount Vernon neighborhood who died in May 2024.
Smith was a member of the Coalition to Decriminalize HIV in Maryland that advocated for the bill. FreeState Justice, a statewide LGBTQ rights group, was also part of the coalition.
“At FreeState Justice, we are proud to stand with advocates, health experts, and lawmakers who worked diligently to advance this bill. The bipartisan support for the Carlton R. Smith Act is a testament to the power of education, research, and courageous leadership,” said FreeState Justice Executive Director Phillip Westry in a statement. “It sends a clear message: Maryland is committed to evidence-based policymaking and to ending the criminalization of people living with HIV. We honor the memory of Carlton R. Smith by continuing the work of building a more just, inclusive, and informed society.”
Maryland is the fifth state to decriminalize HIV.
North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong, a Republican, in March signed a bill that decriminalized HIV in his state.
National
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources
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.
Congress
Marjorie Taylor Greene’s bill to criminalize gender affirming care advances
Judiciary Committee markup slated for Wednesday morning
U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)’s “Protect Children’s Innocence Act,” which would criminalize guideline-directed gender affirming health care for minors, will advance to markup in the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday morning.
Doctors and providers who administer medical treatments for gender dysphoria to patients younger than 18, including hormones and puberty blockers, would be subject to Class 3 felony charges punishable by up to 10 years in prison if the legislation is enacted.
LGBTQ advocates warn conservative lawmakers want to go after families who travel out of state to obtain medical care for their transgender kids that is banned or restricted in the places where they reside, using legislation like Greene’s to expand federal jurisdiction over these decisions. They also point to the medically inaccurate way in which the bill characterizes evidence-based interventions delineated in standards of care for trans and gender diverse youth as “mutilation” or “chemical castration.”
Days into his second term, President Donald Trump signed “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” an executive order declaring that the U.S. would not “fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called ‘transition’ of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit” medical treatments and interventions intended for this purpose.
Greene, who has introduced the bill in years past, noted the president’s endorsement of her bill during his address to the joint session of Congress in March when he said “I want Congress to pass a bill permanently banning and criminalizing sex changes on children and forever ending the lie that any child is trapped in the wrong body.”
Frank Kameny’s legacy lives on
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Marjorie Taylor Greene’s bill to criminalize gender affirming care advances
Delaware considers enshrining same-sex marriage into state Constitution
Pete Buttigieg, eyeing a presidential run, holds Iowa town hall
Calendar: May 16-22
Documentary about Blade reporter to premiere this month
Mike Millan prepares to co-host Helen Hayes Awards
