News
Gohmert: Supreme Court ruling for trans people will create ’great dictators’
Texas lawmaker fear-mongers over First Amendment


Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) had dire predictions Saturday about the fate of the republic if the Supreme Court delivers a victory for transgender people in the pending Title VII cases.
Gohmert, a notorious and longtime opponent of LGBT rights, said the decision would lead to “such obscurity for right and wrong that it will chaos,” and transgender advocates seeking the ruling “think of out of chaos will come these great dictators.”
“Employers, the government…argue that the plaintiff’s reading of Title VII would so expand the concept of sex that employers would not know to comply and courts would not know how to enforce it,” Gohmert said.
Gohmert made the comments during a speech at the Values Voter Summit, an annual social conservative confab in D.C. hosted by the anti-LGBT Family Research Council. His wide-ranging remarks emphasized religiosity, reminisced about the greatness of American figures like George Washington and praised the Ten Commandants.
The Texas lawmaker made a special point to talk about a case the Supreme Court heard this week, EEOC v. Harris Funeral Homes. The litigations seeks restitution for Aimee Stephens, a transgender woman who was fired from her job at Harris Funeral Homes after she announced she’d transition.
The litigation, along with Zarda v. Altitude Express and Bostock v. Clayton County, will determine whether anti-LGBT discrimination is a form of sex discrimination, therefore prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But the way Gohmert tells it, Stephens “ends up being let go” at Harris Funeral Homes “because he was violating their policies, and this is before the Supreme Court.” (Notably, Gohmert refused to refer to Stephens by the pronouns with which she identifies.)
Gohmert also praised U.S. Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, noting the justice during arguments brought up a question on whether a ruling for transgender people will lead to “massive social upheaval.”
“Judge Gorsuch understood,” Gohmert said. “Judge Gorsuch said – asked this question: He says, ‘At the end of the day should he or she take into consideration the massive social upheaval that would be entailed in such a decision, in forcing people to recognizen someone for being them sex that they say they are at that moment?’ Anyway, he says, that is, in fact, more appropriate for a legislative than judicial function.”
While it’s true Gorsuch asked a question on potential “massive social upheaval,” the justice also suggested the pro-transgender side had the better statutory argument in the case. Several times, Gorsuch asked whether the concept of sex is in play in cases of anti-LGBT discrimination. That line of questioning lead to speculation he may rule for LGBT workers.
But Gohmert wasn’t done fear-mongering about a transgender win at the Supreme Court. If transgender workers are assured non-discrimination protections in the workplace, Gohmert said “that first part of the First Amendment will be gone.”
“You will not have the freedom to believe what Moses and Jesus said about sexuality,” Gohmert said. “That will be gone. You will be deemed a hater. You will be deemed to be mean-spirited when you have nothing but love for your fellow man but you know right and wrong, you’ve learned that.”
Further, Gohmert criticized the Matthew Shepard & James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, a law enacted in 2009 (which the lawmaker vigorously opposed at the time) to institute federal penalties for hate crimes against LGBT people.
Gohmert predicted if the law “is not changed — I said it back when it wasbeing brought up, if this passes — someday it’ll be used to prosecute Christian ministers for reading from the Bible.”
“And they thought I was talking about homosexuality,” Gohmert said. “I didn’t want to give them any ideas, but what I had in my mind back then was someday they’re going to come after Christians for saying Jesus said I’m the way the truth and the life. No one goes to the Father but by me. That’s hateful, that’s mean-spirited!”
Gohmert’s comments ignore the protections for religion and speech under the First Amendment, which were emphasized in an amendment included as part of the hate crimes legislation. At the time, advocates for the law said ministers won’t be punished for speech under the law unless they’re committing a violent act against an LGBT person as they speak.
Gillian Branstetter, a spokesperson for the National Center for Transgender Equality, said Gohmert’s concerns about “great dictators” are better focused on President Trump than transgender people.
“The rights of transgender people under Title VII are the result of two decades of federal court rulings, and 21 states have laws banning gender identity bias explicitly,” Branstetter said. “A decision in favor of trans workers in this case would do nothing more than affirm the same rights and opportunities to transgender people nationwide. Unless the Congressman knows something I don’t about our nation’s 2 million transgender people, the closest thing we have to a ‘great dictator’ in this country is our lawless president.”
Congress
Padilla forcibly removed from federal building for questioning DHS secretary
Prominent Democrats rushed to defend senator

Democratic U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla of California was forcibly removed from a federal building in Los Angeles after attempting to ask questions of U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a press conference on immigration Thursday
The city has been rattled in recent days as protestors objecting to the Trump-Vance administration’s immigration crackdowns clashed with law enforcement and then the president deployed National Guard troops and U.S. Marines, which was seen as a dramatic escalation.
According to a video shared by his office, the senator, who serves as ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, introduced himself and said, I have questions for the secretary.” After he was pushed out of the room, officers with FBI-identifying vests told Padilla to put his hands behind his back and handcuffed him.
“Senator Padilla is currently in Los Angeles exercising his duty to perform Congressional oversight of the federal government’s operations in Los Angeles and across California,” reads a statement from his office.
“He was in the federal building to receive a briefing with General Guillot and was listening to Secretary Noem’s press conference,” the statement continued. “He tried to ask the secretary a question, and was forcibly removed by federal agents, forced to the ground and handcuffed. He is not currently detained, and we are working to get additional information.”
Democrats were furious, with many releasing strong statements online condemning the actions of law enforcement officers, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D), and the state’s other U.S. senator, Adam Schiff (D).
Human Rights Campaign Chief of Staff Jay Brown also issued a statement: “A sitting U.S. senator should be allowed to ask a Cabinet secretary a question at a press conference — in his own state, on an issue affecting his constituents — without being violently thrown to the floor and handcuffed. Everyone who cares about our country must condemn this undemocratic act. Full stop.”

The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
Congratulations to Chrys Kefalas and Salah Czapary on their new venture, the Yala Greek Ice Cream Shop, which will open in Georgetown, at 3143 N St. N.W., around July 4.
Kefalas is the CEO and founder, Czapary is the co-founder/director of experience and operations. The third co-founder is Steve Shyn, COO. From what I hear Chrys and Salah will at times both be doing the scooping to the lucky people who stop by their shop. The word “Yala” is a play on the Greek word for “milk,” and fittingly, Yala Greek Ice Cream is made using hand-crafted techniques passed down through three generations of Greek ice cream makers.
Kefalas told the Blade, “This is not frozen yogurt, just inspired by Greek flavors or a trendy twist on gelato. This is true Greek ice cream, finally making its American debut. It is crafted with farm-fresh milk from Maryland, Greek yogurt and honey, fruit preserves from the Mediterranean, and ingredients sourced directly from Greece, Italy, and the Middle East, including premium pistachios and sustainably harvested vanilla.”
The two come from different backgrounds. Kefalas has a family in the restaurant business but is currently the head of the brand division at the National Association of Manufacturers. He is a former Justice Department attorney; worked as Attorney General Eric Holder’s speech writer; Gov. Bob Erlich’s counsel in Maryland; and ran for U.S. Senate in Maryland (endorsed by the Baltimore Sun). Born and raised in Baltimore, he’s a Washingtonian of nine years. He told the Blade, “Yala Ice Cream is a tribute, a legacy, and a love letter across generations.” He spent his early years working in his grandfather’s restaurant in Baltimore, Illona’s. Kefalas hopes, “Just like Greek yogurt changed everything, Greek ice cream is going to set the new standard for ice cream. But, for us, it isn’t just about ice cream; it’s about making my Papou, my grandfather, proud.”
Many people in D.C. know Czapary. He is the son of a Palestinian refugee, and Hungarian immigrant, and a longtime Washington, D.C. resident. Czapary served as a police officer and community engagement leader with the MPD. He then ran for D.C. Council, and although didn’t win, was endorsed by the Washington Post. After that race, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser realized how accomplished he is and asked him to join her administration, where he served as director of the Mayor’s Office of Nightlife and Culture.
Czapary told the Blade, “We’re bringing the first authentic Greek ice cream shop to the U.S., and we’re doing it with heart. We’re building a space where kindness, community, and a scoop of something extraordinary come together. Our Georgetown scoop shop is designed to be a welcoming haven where every guest feels a sense of belonging.”
Delaware
Delaware Senate passes bill to codify same-sex marriage
Measure assigned to House Administration Committee

The bill that would enshrine same-sex marriage into Delaware’s Constitution passed the State Senate Tuesday afternoon.
Senate Substitute Two for Senate Bill 100 passed with a 16 to 5 vote, garnering the two-thirds majority necessary to pass. The bill has been assigned to the House Administration Committee.
SB 100 was introduced in April by Democratic Sen. Russ Huxtable of the sixth district of Delaware. It is the first leg of an amendment to the Delaware Constitution. The act would “establish the right to marry as a fundamental right and that Delaware and its political subdivisions shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender.”
Senate Substitute One was adopted in lieu of the original bill on May 16. SB 100 originally focused exclusively on marriage equality relating to gender and the bill was tweaked to include protection for all classes that fall under Delaware’s Equal Rights Amendment, including race, color, national origin, and sex. Senate Substitute Two was then adopted in lieu of SB 100 on June 5 after being heard by the Senate Executive Committee on May 21.
SS 2 differs from SB 100 by clarifying that the right to marry applies to marriages that are legally valid under the laws of Delaware and that all state laws that are applicable to marriage, married spouses, or the children of married spouses apply equally to marriages that are legally valid. It also removed the need for gender-specific provisions by including gender in the first sentence and revised the language clarifying that the right to marry does not infringe on the right to freedom of religion under Article One of the Delaware Constitution.
“We’re not here to re-litigate the morality of same-sex marriage. That debate has been settled in the hearts and minds of most Americans, and certainly here in Delaware,” Sen. Huxtable said at Tuesday’s hearing. “We are here because the fundamental rights should never be left vulnerable to political whims or the ideological makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Other states such as California, Colorado, and Hawaii have introduced and passed similar bills to protect the right of all people of all genders to marry under state law.
“This bill sends a strong message that Delaware protects its people, that we will not wait for rights to be taken away before we act,” Sen. Huxtable said at the hearing. “Voting in favor of this amendment is not just the legal mechanism of marriage, it’s about affirming the equal humanity of every Delawarean.”
-
World Pride 202522 hours ago
WorldPride recap: Festival, parade, fireworks, and Doechii
-
U.S. Federal Courts1 day ago
Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups
-
Photos1 day ago
PHOTOS: WorldPride Parade
-
World Pride 20254 days ago
LGBTQ voices echo from the Lincoln Memorial at International Rally for Freedom