District of Columbia
Independent at-large D.C. Council candidates endorse LGBTQ rights at forum
Race considered only contest on ballot with uncertain outcome
Four of the five independent candidates running in the Nov. 8 election for two at-large D.C. Council seats expressed strong support for LGBTQ rights at a virtual candidates forum Monday night, Oct. 17, sponsored by the Capital Stonewall Democrats.
The D.C. LGBTQ Democratic group limited the forum to the five independent candidates running against a Democrat, Republican, and a Statehood Green Party candidate for two at-large seats, one of which must go to a non-majority party candidate under D.C.’s election law.
The four independents who participated were incumbent D.C. Council member Elissa Silverman (I-At-Large), attorney Karim D. Marshall, businessman Fred Hill, and former corporate manager and small business advocate Graham McLaughlin. The fifth independent running, incumbent D.C. Council member Kenyan McDuffie (I-Ward 5), was unable to attend due to a scheduling conflict, according to Capital Stonewall Democrats President Jatarious Frazier.
Frazier noted that the Stonewall Dems group has endorsed the other at-large incumbent Council member, Anita Bonds, a Democrat. He said the group decided against endorsing a second at-large candidate on grounds that the other candidate would be running against the group’s Democratic endorsee.
But Frazier said Capital Stonewall Democrats decided to organize the forum to help its members and other LGBTQ voters decide whom to support for the second at-large Council seat that cannot go to a Democrat.
Both Bonds and McDuffie have longstanding records of support on LGBTQ related issues. With all the at-large candidates having expressed support on LGBTQ issues, local activists have said LGBTQ voters will likely select the two candidates they vote for based on non-LGBTQ issues.
The remaining two of the eight at-large Council candidates on the ballot are Republican Giuseppe Niosi, who marched in D.C.’s Capital Pride Parade in June, and Statehood Green Party candidate David Schwartzman, who has expressed support for LGBTQ rights.
The two co-moderators of the forum, Rebecca Bauer, a member of the board of the D.C. Center for the LGBT Community, and Larry Miller, WUSA 9 TV anchor and morning show host, asked the candidates questions on a wide range of both LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ issues.
Longtime D.C. political observers point out that with the city’s overwhelmingly Democratic electorate, the Democratic candidate running for mayor – incumbent Mayor Muriel Bowser – and incumbent Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large), along with the Democrats running for Council seats in Wards 1, 3, 5, and 6 are all considered odds-on favorites to win. Among them is gay Ward 5 Democratic candidate Zachary Parker, who is considered the strong front-runner in the Ward 5 race.
It’s just the at-large race, where only one Democrat is allowed to run, in which the outcome is uncertain, observers have said.
Among the independent candidates appearing at the Capital Stonewall Dems forum on Monday, which was broadcast over Zoom and which Frazier said will be available for viewing online, McLaughlin was the only one who claimed to have worked directly with LGBTQ organizations and LGBTQ people in his role as an advocate for homeless youth.
“In a nation where 40 percent of homeless youth are LGBTQ, and that number is pretty high into one’s 20s as well, I opened my home to a member of that community who was homeless,” McLaughlin told the forum. “I have partnered and walked with individuals who are of color and who are in the LGBTQ community to be able to help launch businesses,” he said, adding that he has collaborated with the Trevor Project, a national organization that provides suicide prevention and crisis intervention services for LGBTQ young people.
Silverman, Marshall, and Hill each told of their own efforts to improve the services that city agencies provide for LGBTQ youth and seniors.
Following is a Washington Blade transcript of the opening remarks of each of the four who participated in the Capital Stonewall Democrats forum.
Fred E. Hill (Independent)
Thank you so much for the invitation to share with you this evening. My name is Fred Hill. I’m Number 3 on the ballot. And I’m an independent running in this race for at-large. Many know that I’m a 25-year successful business owner here in the city and a veteran and a father and a grandfather.
More importantly, for my standing for the last 25 years is my desire to change this government. We have watched how the government right now is running almost as a failing enterprise and it does not consider the concerns and the management of money and the trust of the residents here in the District of Columbia. I seek to change that. I bring the courage, the understanding and knowledge of what is needed on this Council right now.
We have watched where public safety, housing, and education all have been the same concerns in the last four years repeating itself again. So, I should tell everyone that those who were on the Council in its entirety did not do what the people needed and it’s time to make a change for that. Again, my name is Fred Hill. I’m Number 3 on the ballot and I’m asking for one of your two votes. Thank you.
Karim D. Marshall (Independent)
Good afternoon. And thank you to the Stonewall Dems for hosting this event for independents. It is a pleasure to be here before the only political organization in the city that’s named after a righteous riot. My name is Karim D. Marshall. I’m running to be the next at-large Council member and I’m asking for one of your two votes. I’m Number 2 on the ballot. I’m a third generation Washingtonian, a proud product of the District of Columbia public school system, a graduate of Dartmouth College and an American law school.
But most importantly, I’m a father and a husband. I’m currently general counsel for a nonprofit foundation and a professor of environmental justice. But before that, I had more than a decade of experience for the District of Columbia government, writing laws, implementing programs, and advancing equity. I know what this government does well, what it does poorly, and I know how to make broken systems work to serve the residents of our city.
I wish we could stay together in person and talk about the issues that will be covered today in the detail they deserve. But I will do my best to put as much information into each answer as possible. I’m looking forward to hearing about what your community needs to be successful and what could be improved in protection and service programs, what our nonprofits can be doing more effectively to serve you, and what the government can be doing to meet the needs before they become a crisis.
Again, my name is Karim Marshall. I’m number two on the ballot and I’m asking for one of your two votes.
Graham McLaughlin (Independent)
Hello, and I echo Karim in saying thank you to the Stonewall Dems for hosting this and letting us have important discussions on some of these critical issues for the city. You have two votes, as you know. And it really comes down to who do you think has the head and the heart to deliver the results that this city needs, and the LGBTQ community needs. From a heart perspective in a nation where 40 percent of homeless youth are LGBTQ, and that number is pretty high into one’s 20s as well. I opened my home to a member of that community who was homeless.
When we’re in a country, unfortunately, that still, if you are an LGBTQ person of color, you have lower wages, harder opportunities to become employed, etcetera. I have partnered and walked with individuals who are of color and who are in the LGBTQ community to be able to help launch businesses. From a head level, I lead a help equity program focused on critical issues that we’re going to talk about today. I’ve partnered with the Trevor Project to ensure that LGBTQ youth of color who desire the same access to mental health service as their white peers but have significantly less access to it, would be able to receive those same services and would have the outreach necessarily by culturally competent support professionals to do so.
Having shared that 18 percent of transgender individuals who are turned away from care would not do so at a health level. I’ve been doing this work significantly. I’d love the opportunity to be able to do it in government.
D.C. Council member Elissa Silverman (Independent)
Good evening, Rebecca and Jatarious and Larry and everyone watching. My name is Elissa Silverman. And for the last eight years I have been serving you as an at-large Council member. I’m the incumbent. I’m an independent. And I am as well asking you for one of your two votes. I’m asking you to return me back to the Council for another four years.
I’ve worked my heart out these last eight years in trying to make life better for working families, including LGBTQ working families in this city. I think a lot of people know me for paid family leave and the benefits that brings to LGBTQ families. Beyond that, as the Labor chair I’ve had a real focus on making sure people have access to good living wage jobs. And I’ve also been able to survive these past two years in COVID.
I have a big focus on oversight, which is clear, as Colby King said, being kind of a solitary voice in trying to highlight the issues with the D.C. Housing Authority. I think we can spend your tax dollars better so our city can be more equitable and just. And I ask for one of your votes to do that.
The Capital Stonewall Democrats’ independent candidate forum can be viewed in its entirety here.
District of Columbia
Judge issues revised order in Capital Pride stalking case
Defendant Darren Pasha agreed to accept less restrictive directive
A D.C. Superior Court judge on April 30 reinstated an anti-stalking order requested by the Capital Pride Alliance against local gay activist Darren Pasha based on allegations that Pasha engaged in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk the organization’s staff, board members, and volunteers.
The reinstated order by Judge Robert D. Okun followed an April 17 court hearing in which he rescinded a similar order he initially approved in February on grounds that more evidence was needed to substantiate the need for the order.
At the time he rescinded the earlier order he scheduled an evidentiary hearing for April 29 at which three Capital Pride staff members testified in support of the anti-stalking order. But Okun discontinued the hearing after Pasha, who was representing himself without an attorney, announced he was willing to accept a revised, less restrictive temporary restraining order.
The judge said Pasha’s decision to accept a restraining order made it no longer necessary to continue the evidentiary hearing. He then asked Capital Pride and Pasha to submit their suggested revisions for the order which they submitted a short time later.
The case began when Capital Pride Alliance, the D.C.-based LGBTQ group that organizes the city’s annual Pride events, filed a civil complaint on Oct. 27, 2025, against Pasha, accusing him of engaging in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk Capital Pride staff, board members, and volunteers. It includes a 167-page addendum of “supporting exhibits” that includes multiple statements by unidentified witnesses.
Pasha, who has represented himself without an attorney, has argued in multiple court filings and motions that the stalking allegations are untrue. In his initial court response to the complaint, he said it appears to be a form of retaliation against him for a dispute he has had with Capital Pride and its former board president, Ashley Smith, who has since resigned from the board.
Similar to his earlier anti-stalking order against Pasha, Okun’s reissued order on April 30 states, a “Temporary Anti-Stalking Order is GRANTED, effective immediately and remaining in effect until further order of the Court or final disposition of this matter.”
It adds, “The defendant shall not contact, attempt to contact, harass, threaten, or otherwise communicate with any protected person, directly or indirectly, including through third parties, social media, electronic communication, or any other means.”
Unlike the earlier order, which did not identify the “protected persons” by name, the latest order includes a list of 34 people, 13 of whom are Capital Pride staff members or volunteers, including CEO Ryan Bos and Chief Operating Officer June Crenshaw. The other 21 people listed are identified as Capital Pride board members, including board chair Anna Jinkerson.
Possibly because Pasha addressed this in his suggested version of the order, the judge’s revised order says Pasha is allowed to visit the D.C. LGBTQ+ Community Center, where the Capital Pride office is located, if he gives the community center a 24 hour advance notice that he will be visiting the center, which hosts many events unrelated to Capital Pride. The earlier order required him to stay at least 100 feet away from the Capital Pride office.
The new order also prohibits Pasha from attending 21 named events that Capital Pride Alliance either organizes itself or with partner organizations that were scheduled to take place from April 30 through June 21. The order says he is allowed to attend the two largest events, the June 20 Pride Parade and the June 21 Pride Festival and Concert, in which 500,000 or more people are expected to attend.
It says Pasha is also allowed to attend the June 15 Pride At The Pier event organized by the Washington Blade.
But for those three events the order says he is restricted from entering “ticketed and controlled access areas.”
At the April 29 court hearing, Okun also scheduled a mandatory remote mediation session for July 23, in which efforts would be made to resolve the civil complaint case brought by Capital Pride without going to trial.
District of Columbia
Both sides propose revised orders in Capital Pride stalking case
Defendant Darren Pasha agreed to accept less restrictive directive
An evidentiary hearing in D.C. Superior Court on April 29 in which the Capital Pride Alliance presented three of four planned witnesses to testify in support of its civil complaint that D.C. gay activist Darren Pasha engaged in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk its staff, board members, and volunteers ended abruptly at the direction of the judge.
Judge Robert D. Okun announced from the bench that the hearing, which was intended provide Capital Pride an opportunity to present evidence in support of its request to reinstate an anti-stalking order against Pasha that the judge temporarily rescinded on April 17, was no longer needed because Pasha stated at the hearing that he is willing to accept a revised, less restrictive temporary restraining order.
Pasha made that statement after two Capital Pride witnesses — June Crenshaw and Vincenzo Volpe — each testified in support of the stalking allegations against Pasha for over an hour under questioning from Capital Pride attorney Nick Harrison and under cross-examination from Pasha, who is representing himself without an attorney.
After Capital Pride’s third witness, Tifany Royster, testified for just a few minutes, and after the judge called a recess for lunch and to attend to an unrelated case, Pasha announced that after obtaining legal advice he determined that he was unsuited to continue cross-examining the witnesses. He said he would be willing to accept a significantly less restrictive temporary restraining order.
Okun then ruled that the evidentiary hearing was no longer needed and directed Capital Pride and Pasha to submit to him their version of a revised stay away order. He said he would use their proposed revisions to help him develop his own order, which he would issue after deliberating over the matter.
He also scheduled a mandatory remote mediation session for July 23, in which efforts would be made to resolve the case without going to trial. He then adjourned the hearing at 3:50 p.m.
The online Superior Court docket for the case stated after the hearing ended that the judge would issue “a new modified Temporary Protective Order,” but it did not say when it would be issued.
Shortly before the April 29 hearing began at 11 a.m., Harrison filed a “Draft Temporary Anti-Stalking Order” that included a list of 34 “Protected Persons” that Harrison said during the hearing were affiliated with Capital Pride Alliance as staff and board members, volunteers, and others associated with the group.
The proposed order stated, “The defendant shall not contact, attempt to contact, harass, threaten, or otherwise communicate with any protected person, directly or indirectly, including through third parties, social media, electronic communications, or any other means.”
The proposal represented a significant change from Capital Pride’s initial civil complaint against Pasha filed in February that Pasha claimed called for him to stay away at least 200 yards from all Capital pride staff, board members, and volunteers without naming them. Okun granted that stay away request in February but reduced the stay away distance to 100 feet.
Capital Pride attorney Harrison disputes Pasha’s interpretation of the order, saying the 100-foot stay-away was for events, not for individual Capital Pride staff, volunteers, or board members. He said the order prohibited Pasha from engaging in any way with the Capital Pride staffers, volunteers or board members.
But the proposed order Capital Pride at first submitted at the April 29 hearing also called for Pasha to stay away from and to not attend as many as 25 Capital Pride events scheduled to take place this year from April 30 through June 21 and for him to say away from the Capital Pride office located at 1827 Wiltberger St., N.W., which is the building in which it shares with the DC LGBTQ Community Center.
At the April 29 hearing, at Pasha’s request, Okun called on Capital Pride to consider allowing Pasha to attend at least the two largest events — the Capital Pride Parade and Festival — which draw over 500,000 participants.
Harrison said in a follow-up message to the judge following the hearing that Capital Pride would allow Pasha to attend those two events and one other as long as he stays away from “ticketed and controlled access areas.”
At an April 17 status hearing Okun rescinded the earlier stay away order at Pasha’s request, among other things, on grounds that it was too vague and didn’t provide Pasha with sufficient specific information on who to stay away from. It was at that hearing that Okun scheduled the April 29 evidentiary hearing, saying it would give Capital Pride a chance to provide sufficient evidence to justify an anti-stalking order and Pasha an opportunity to challenge the evidence.
In his own response to the initial civil complaint filed in February and in subsequent court filings, Pasha has strongly denied he engaged in stalking and has alleged that the complaint was a form of retaliation against him over a dispute he has had with Capital Pride and its former board president, Ashley Smith.
Like its initial complaint filed in February, Capital Pride filed a multipage document at the start of the April 29 hearing with written testimony from staff members and volunteers who allege that Pasha did engage in stalking, harassment, and intimidating behavior toward them and others.
Like Capital Pride, Pasha following the April 29 hearing, filed his own proposed version of the stay away order with significantly less restrictions than the Capital Pride proposal. Among other things, it calls for him to restrict his contact with Capital Pride CEO Ryan Bos and Crenshaw but says it “does not by its terms restrict the defendant’s communications with any other person, entity, governmental body, or media outlet.”
“Darren Pasha sent multiple messages to us and to the court after the proceedings asking for further modifications — which we are not accepting or responding to,” Harrison told the Blade in response to a request for further comment on Judge’s request for each side to submit proposed revisions of the stay away order.
“We appreciate the court’s time and careful attention to the evidence presented today,” Harrison told the Washington Blade in a written statement after the hearing. “This process was about bringing forward the experiences of individuals who reported a pattern of conduct that caused fear, serious alarm, and emotional distress,” he said.
“Capital Pride Alliance remains committed to ensuring that our events and community spaces are safe, welcoming, and free from harassment and we will continue to take appropriate steps to support and protect our community,” his statement says.
“I am happy with what we have accomplished so far,” Pasha told the Blade after the hearing. “I’m just waiting to see what will happen next. But I want to reiterate this goes back to when someone treats you wrong you speak up,” he said. “Even if I lose this case, I am glad that I spoke up and raised concerns.”
He added, “I will just be confident that in the next couple of months the truth will come out. But for now, I am happy with the progress that we have made regarding this.”
This story will be updated when the judge issues his revised stay away order.
District of Columbia
U.S. Attorney’s Office fails to reinstate hate crime charge in anti-gay assault
The Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C., which prosecutes criminal cases in the District, has decided not to reinstate a hate crime designation filed by D.C. police against a man arrested in February for allegedly assaulting a gay man while using “homophobic slurs.”
After prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office initially dropped the hate crime designation filed by police shortly after the alleged attacker was arrested on Feb. 7, a spokesperson for the office told the Washington Blade the case was still under investigation, and additional charges could be filed.
“We continue to investigate this matter and make no mistake: should the evidence call for further charges, we will not hesitate to charge them,” a statement released by the office in February said.
But D.C. Superior Court records show the case against defendant Dean Edmundson, 26, of Germantown, Md., who is now charged with Simple Assault without a hate crime designation, is scheduled to go to trial on Aug. 18.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office this week did not immediately respond to a message from the Blade asking why it chose not to reinstate the hate crime designation.
An affidavit in support of the arrest filed in court by D.C. police appears to support the charge of a hate crime designation. It says the incident occurred around 7:45 p.m. on Feb. 7 at the intersection of 14th and Q Streets, N.W., which is near two D.C. gay bars.
“The victim stated that they refused to High-Five Defendant Edmundson, which, upon that happening, Defendant Edmundson started walking behind both the victim and witness, calling the victim bald, ugly, and gay,” the arrest affidavit states.
“The victim stated that upon being called that, Defendant Edmundson pushed the victim with both hands, shoving them, causing the victim to feel the force of the push,” the affidavit says, adding, “The victim stated that they felt offended and that they were also gay.”
Under D.C.’s Bias Related Crimes Act of 1989, penalties for crimes motivated by prejudice and hate against individuals based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity disability, and homelessness can be enhanced by a judge upon conviction by one and a half times greater than the penalty of the underlying crime.
-
Federal Government4 days agoRepublicans attach five anti-LGBTQ riders to State Department funding bill
-
District of Columbia5 days agoBoth sides propose revised orders in Capital Pride stalking case
-
Opinions3 days agoTennessee’s trans data bill a frightening omen
-
Congress5 days agoBill seeks to block global gag rule expansion
