District of Columbia
D.C. trans woman files bias lawsuit against Whole Foods, Amazon
Co-workers accused of ‘threats to do bodily injury,’ ‘lewd, obscene acts’

A lawsuit filed by a D.C. transgender woman in July 2022 accuses the Whole Foods supermarket company and its parent company Amazon.com, Inc. with failing to stop as many as 20 Whole Foods employees in six D.C.-area Whole Foods stores from allegedly subjecting the trans woman who worked in those stores with sexual harassment and assault, threats of assault, anti-trans name-calling, and lewd and obscene gestures.
Court records show two separate complaints, one against Whole Foods and the other against Amazon, were initially filed July 11, 2022, in D.C. Superior Court by Vanessa Navarrete, who later changed her name to Ximena Navarrete, after the case was transferred in August 2022 to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
The records show Navarrete’s initial filing in U.S. District Court called for $1 million in damages from Whole Foods, with a second filing two months later in the same federal court calling for $1.5 million in damages from Amazon.
An initial answer to the complaint filed Nov. 3, 2022, by attorneys representing Amazon states, “Amazon denies that it engaged in any wrongful conduct with respect to Plaintiff,” among other reasons, on grounds that Amazon “was not Plaintiff’s employer.”
But a 57-page amended complaint filed as part of the lawsuit on Jan. 5, 2023, names as defendants in the lawsuit Amazon.com, Inc.; Prime Now LLC, the Amazon-owned company that operates the Whole Foods supermarket chain; and D.C.-area Whole Foods employees listed as “John Doe 1-10” and “Jane Doe 11-20.”
In subsequent court filings, Amazon attorneys repeatedly assert that the defendant in the case is Prime Now LLC “improperly identified as Amazon.”
The complaint describes in graphic terms the allegations made by Navarrete in her lawsuit.
“During the course of Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff was subjected to a pattern of discrimination, harassment, threats to do bodily injury, lewd, indecent, and/or obscene acts, indecent exposure, offensive language, offensive and unwanted physical contact, due to Plaintiff’s sex, perceived sex, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, gender expression, race, national origin, age and disability,” the complaint states.
“During the course of Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant Amazon and members of management were indifferent to the discrimination, harassment, threats to do bodily injury, lewd, indecent and/or obscene acts, indecent exposure, offensive and unwanted physical contact to which Plaintiff was subjected,” according to the complaint.
The lawsuit says Navarrete, 46, worked at the D.C. Whole Foods stores at the 1400 block of P Street, N.W. and in D.C.’s Tenleytown and Friendship Heights neighborhoods as well as the stores in Silver Spring, Md. and Arlington and Springfield in Virginia from Sept. 20, 2020, to Oct. 6, 2021, as a “Prime Now – Whole Foods Shopper,” a position in which she fulfilled food orders placed by customers online.
Supporting documents filed with the lawsuit say the alleged mistreatment of Navarrete began on her first day at work at one of the Whole Foods stores when a manager required her to wear a name badge with her birth name. Court documents show that she disclosed her birth name at the time she applied for the job and openly identified as transgender and requested, with Whole Foods managers initially agreeing, that she be identified and addressed as a female with her female name.
Her wearing a name tag with the male dead name played a key role in prompting co-workers to begin harassing her, court documents show.
Court records also show she identified herself as “Victor Navarrete (Vanessa)” in the first, handwritten version of her lawsuit filed in D.C. Superior Court, which she filed herself without an attorney. Her first amended complaint filed in the U.S. District Court identifies her as “Victor Navarrete a/k/a Vanessa Navarrete.” However, the lawsuit repeatedly states that she made it clear to managers and officials with Whole Foods Human Resources Department that she identifies as a female and wants to be addressed and listed in work-related documents by her female name.
According to the lawsuit, her employment with Whole Foods was terminated in October 2021 due to discrimination based, among other things, on her status as a Latina transgender woman and “for seeking redress from the discrimination and/or harassment.”
The Jan. 5, 2023, amended complaint charges Amazon and Whole Foods with violating the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, the D.C. Human Rights Act, and the D.C. Bias Related Crimes Act for their “wrongful employment practices against Plaintiff.”
The Washington Blade reached out by phone and email to the two lead attorneys representing Amazon in the lawsuit – Michael A. Chichester Jr. and Brandon Robert Mita of the D.C. law firm Littler Mendelson PC for comment on the case on behalf of Amazon and Whole Foods. Neither responded to the request for comment.
The Blade similarly reached out by email to spokespersons for Amazon and Whole Foods seeking comment on the lawsuit. As of Aug. 1, neither had replied.
The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, a national LGBTQ advocacy organization, has awarded Amazon, Inc. its highest score of 100% in its 2023-2024 Corporate Equality Index rating that evaluates LGBTQ supportive policies for employees.
The HRC Corporate Equality Index did not have a rating for Prime Now LLC or Whole Foods.
Court records show that Navarrete also filed a discrimination complaint against Amazon regarding her employment at Whole Foods with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on April 5, 2021, and another discrimination complaint against Amazon for the same alleged improper treatment with the D.C. Office of Human Rights on that same day.
The court records show that the EEOC on Jan. 4, 2023, issued a “right to sue” letter clearing the way for Navarrete to file her lawsuit in federal court under court rules that require people alleging employment discrimination to seek an “administrative” remedy before going to court.
The most recent court records show that U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who is presiding over the lawsuit case, in April of this year denied a motion by Navarette’s attorneys to file another amended complaint with new allegations against Whole Foods employees. Among the new allegations, court records show, is that a Whole Foods male employee allegedly “groped” Navarrete’s buttocks and breasts, another employee allegedly exposed his genitals to her, and another allegedly sent her “explicit text messages and photographs of male genitals.”
Yet another new allegation, the record shows, is a security guard working for Whole Foods allegedly visited Navarette at her home and raped her after asking her for sex in exchange for helping her resolve her problems at work.
The Blade couldn’t immediately find in the court records a reason given by the judge for denying the motion to file the new amended complaint. But a motion filed by Amazon’s attorneys opposing the request by Navarette to amend the complaint argues that the new allegations are significantly different from the allegations in her original complaint and would be legally “untimely” in violation of court rules.
In reference to its call for monetary damages and compensation, the lawsuit states that because of Amazon’s “unlawful conduct,” Navarrete “has suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and emotional distress, including but not limited to, humiliation, embarrassment, stress and anxiety, loss of self-esteem and confidence, and emotional pain and suffering, as well as physical injury, for which she is entitled to an award of compensatory damages and other relief.”
As of Aug. 1, the court records show that no trial date has been set for the case. The records do show that as required by court rules, the two sides entered mediation last year in an effort to reach a resolution to settle the case, but the mediation ended with no agreement being reached.
Erica Bilkis, one of two attorneys with the D.C. law firm Alan Lescht & Associates representing Ximena Navarrete, pointed out that 55 years after the Stonewall Rebellion started the modern LGBTQ rights movement, “trans women of color are still being persecuted and fighting for equal treatment in their personal and professional lives.” Bilkis added, “We are hopeful that we will not only bring justice on behalf of Ms. Navarrete, but also encourage others to bravely speak out against this systemic issue.”
District of Columbia
Drive with Pride in D.C.
A new Pride-themed license plate is now available in the District, with proceeds directly benefiting local LGBTQ organizations.

Just in time for Pride month, the D.C. Department of Motor Vehicles has partnered with the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs to create a special “Pride Lives Here” license plate.
The plate, which was initially unveiled in February, has a one-time $25 application fee and a $20 annual display fee. Both fees will go directly to the Office of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning Affairs Fund.
The MOLGBTQA Fund provides $1,000,000 annually to 25,000 residents through its grant program, funding a slew of LGBTQ organizations in the DMV area — including Capital Pride Alliance, Whitman-Walker, the D.C. Center for the LGBTQ Community, and the Washington Blade Foundation.
The license plate features an inclusive rainbow flag wrapping around the license numbers, with silver stars in the background — a tribute to both D.C.’s robust queer community and the resilience the LGBTQ community has shown.
The “Pride Lives Here” plate is one of only 13 specialty plates offered in the District, and the only one whose fees go directly to the LGBTQ community.
To apply for a Pride plate, visit the DC DMV’s website at https://dmv.dc.gov/
District of Columbia
Drag queens protest Trump at the Kennedy Center
President attended ‘Les Misérables’ opening night on Wednesday

On Wednesday night, four local drag performers attended the first night of the Kennedy Center’s season in full drag — while President Donald Trump, an outspoken critic of drag, sat mere feet away.
Three queens — Tara Hoot, Vagenesis, and Mari Con Carne — joined drag king Ricky Rosé to represent Qommittee, a volunteer network uniting drag artists to support and defend each other amid growing conservative attacks. They all sat down with the Washington Blade to discuss the event.
The drag performers were there to see the opening performance of “Les Misérables” since Trump’s takeover of the historically non-partisan Kennedy Center. The story shows the power of love, compassion, and redemption in the face of social injustice, poverty, and oppression, set in late 19th century France.
Dressed in full drag, the group walked into the theater together, fully aware they could be punished for doing so.
“It was a little scary walking in because we don’t know what we’re going to walk into, but it was really helpful to be able to walk in with friends,” said drag queen Vagenesis. “The strongest response we received was from the staff who worked there. They were so excited and grateful to see us there. Over and over and over again, we heard ‘Thank you so much for being here,’ ‘Thank you for coming,’ from the Kennedy Center staff.”
The staff weren’t the only ones who seemed happy at the act of defiance.
“We walked in together so we would have an opportunity to get a response,” said Tara Hoot, who has performed at the Kennedy Center in full drag before. “It was all applause, cheers, and whistles, and remarkably it was half empty. I think that was season ticket holders kind of making their message in a different way.”
Despite the love from the audience and staff, Mari Con Carne said she couldn’t help feeling unsettled when Trump walked in.
“I felt two things — disgust and frustration,” Carne said. “Obviously, I don’t align with anything the man has to say or has to do. And the frustration came because I wanted to do more than just sit there. I wanted to walk up to him and speak my truth — and speak for the voices that were being hurt by his actions right now.”
They weren’t the only ones who felt this way according to Vagenesis:
“Somebody shouted ‘Fuck Trump’ from the rafters. I’d like to think that our being there encouraged people to want to express themselves.”
The group showing up in drag and expressing themselves was, they all agreed, an act of defiance.
“Drag has always been a protest, and it always will be a sort of resistance,” Carne said, after pointing out her intersectional identity as “queer, brown, Mexican immigrant” makes her existence that much more powerful as a statement. “My identity, my art, my existence — to be a protest.”
Hoot, who is known for her drag story times, explained that protesting can look different than the traditional holding up signs and marching for some.
“Sometimes protesting is just us taking up space as drag artists,” Hoot added. “I felt like being true to who you are — it was an opportunity to live the message.”
And that message, Ricky Rosé pointed out, was ingrained with the institution of the Kennedy Center and art itself — it couldn’t be taken away, regardless of executive orders and drag bans
“The Kennedy Center was founded more than 50 years ago as a place meant to celebrate the arts in its truest, extraordinary form,” said Ricky Rosé. “President Kennedy himself even argued that culture has a great practical value in an age of conflict. He was quoted saying, ‘the encouragement of art is political in the most profound sense, not as a weapon in the struggle, but as an instrument of understanding the futility of struggle’ and I believe that is the basis of what the Kennedy Center was founded on, and should continue. And drag fits perfectly within it.”
All four drag performers told the Washington Blade — independently of one another — that they don’t think Trump truly understood the musical he was watching.
“I don’t think the president understands any kind of plot that’s laid out in front of him,” Vagenesis said. “I’m interested to see what he thinks about “Les Mis,” a play about revolution against an oppressive regime. I get the feeling that he identifies with the the rebellion side of it, instead of the oppressor. I just feel like he doesn’t get it. I feel it goes right over his head.”
“Les Misérables” is running at the Kennedy Center until July 13.
District of Columbia
Man arrested for destroying D.C. Pride decorations, spray painting hate message
Prosecutors initially did not list offense as hate crime before adding ‘bias’ designation

D.C. police this week announced they have arrested a Maryland man on charges of Destruction of Property and Defacing Private Property for allegedly pulling down and ripping apart rainbow colored cloth Pride ornaments on light poles next to Dupont Circle Park on June 2.
In a June 10 statement police said the suspect, identified as Michel Isaiah Webb, Jr., 30, also allegedly spray painted an anti-LGBTQ message on the window of a private residence in the city’s Southwest waterfront neighborhood two days later on June 4.
An affidavit in support of the arrest filed by police in D.C. Superior Court on June 9 says Web was captured on a video surveillance camera spray painting the message “Fuck the LGBT+ ABC!” and “God is Real.” The affidavit does not say what Webb intended the letters “ABC” to stand for.
“Detectives located video and photos in both offenses and worked to identify the suspect,” the police statement says. “On Sunday, June 8, 2025, First District officers familiar with these offenses observed the suspect in Navy Yard and made an arrest without incident.”
The statement continues: “As a result of the detectives investigation, 30-year-old Michael Isaiah Webb, Jr. of Landover, Md. was charged with Destruction of Property and Defacing Private Property.”
It concludes by saying, “The Metropolitan Police Department is investigating this case as potentially being motivated by hate or bias. The designation can be changed at any point as the investigation proceeds, and more information is gathered. A designation as a hate crime by MPD does not mean that prosecutors will prosecute it as a hate crime.”
The online D.C. Superior Court docket for the case shows that prosecutors with the Office of the United States Attorney for D.C. charged Webb with just one offense – Defacing Public or Private Property.
The charging document first filed by prosecutors on June 9, which says the offense was committed on June 4, declares that Webb “willfully and wantonly wrote, marked, drew, and painted a word, sign, or figure upon property, that is window(s), without the consent of Austin Mellor, the owner and the person lawfully in charge thereof.”
But the initial charging document did not designate the offense as a hate crime or bias motivated crime as suggested by D.C. police as a possible hate crime.
A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office on Tuesday didn’t immediately respond to a request from the Washington Blade for an explanation of why the office did not designate the offense as a hate crime and why it did not charge Webb in court with the second charge filed by D.C. police of destruction of Property for allegedly destroying the Pride decorations at Dupont Circle.
However, at 12:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 11, the spokesperson sent the Washington Blade a copy of an “amended” criminal charge against Webb by the U..S. Attorney’s office that designates the offense as a hate crime. Court records show the amended charge was filed in court at 10:18 a.m. on June 11.
The revised charge now states that the criminal act “demonstrated the prejudice of Michael Webb based on sexual orientation (bias-related crime): Defacing Public or Private Property” in violation of the D.C. criminal code.
The U.S. Attorney’s office as of late Wednesday had not provided an explanation of why it decided not to prosecute Webb for the Destruction of Property charge filed by D.C. police for the destruction of Pride decorations at Dupont Circle.
The online public court records show that at a June 9 court arraignment Webb pleaded not guilty and Superior Court Judge Robert J. Hildum released him while awaiting trial while issuing a stay-away order. The public court records do not include a copy of the stay-away order. The judge also ordered Webb to return to court for a June 24 status hearing, the records show.
The arrest affidavit filed by D.C. police says at the time of his arrest, Webb waived his right to remain silent. It says he claimed he knew nothing at all about the offenses he was charged with.
“However, Defendant 1 stated something to the effect of, ‘It’s not a violent crime’ several times during the interview” with detectives, according to the affidavit.
The charge filed against him by prosecutors of Defacing Public or Private Property is a misdemeanor that carries a possible maximum penalty of 180 days in jail and a fine up to $1,000.