Local
The lawyer strengthening LGBTQ partnerships for five decades
Larry Jacobs’s lifetime of advocacy
When most people come out, becoming a pillar of the queer community isn’t usually top of mind. Instead, they often reflect on gaining confidence in their environment, finding love and relationships, and embracing their true selves. But when one Maryland lawyer came out, he unexpectedly found himself becoming a hero to many.
Fifty years ago Lawrence (Larry) Jacobs was living a life that looked picture-perfect: A successful law career, a wife, and a son. But when he came out as gay, everything changed.
“When I started practicing law 50 years ago, there was basically no such thing by and large as openly gay people, much less openly gay lawyers,” Jacobs told the Blade about his days prior to coming out. “I was married to a woman and had a kid. I was pretty closeted until the first 10 years of my career.”
Despite the beginnings of a successful career, Jacobs felt he wasn’t being truly himself and decided to change that. It was difficult leaving his familiar beginnings and facing unsupportive people.
“When I did come out in ‘83 I got tossed out of my own law firm for being gay by my [law] partner,” he said. “So that was not a good start.”
Yet he didn’t let this change in track become a setback. Instead he used what he learned through college, law school, and life to direct him to where he needed to be. This direction, stemming from his understanding of law, began to flourish into much more for the Maryland LGBTQ community.
“I started representing gay business owners in doing corporate and business work, which was always something I was interested in,” Jacobs said. “So lo and behold, as I got more comfortable being out and I had a [romantic] partner, I started nibbling around the edges of doing activist work in Montgomery County.”
This work began with working on wills and estate planning.
“I had my first set of gay business owner clients who said, ‘Larry, we need wills,’” he recounted. “And I said, ‘I’ve never written a will.’ And they basically said, ‘Figure it out.’ That was almost 2,000 wills ago.”
During the time when Jacobs started writing wills in the 1980s, HIV, AIDS, bigotry, and sadness came to many in the community with little support from mainstream politicians.
“You know the old AIDS days, ‘80s and ‘90s, where the families would swoop in and carry the body off to Iowa and the partner would never see them again,” Jacobs recalled. “There were all these heartbreaking stories about that.”
He explained that these stories were not just kept to the queer media sidelines either. This issue was growing more and more prevalent in American society.
“One of the turning points, ironically, was a made-for-TV movie that was on HBO called ‘If These Walls Could Talk.’” Jacobs said. “It was a series of vignettes about lesbians. A fabulous actress played a grieving surviving spouse of her partner who had just died. They’re literally carrying stuff out of the house, carrying the TV and furniture and paintings out, and she’s sitting there crying.”
Seeing these tragic stories playing out in front of him, both on screen and in real life motivated Jacobs. He knew he could do more to help.
“What little bits of things can I do to make gay life better in Montgomery County, for the people that come after me,” Jacobs began to wonder. He realized that in the fight for rights, being seen is crucial to gaining acceptance.
“Working with some people, we actually put together early Montgomery Prides and ran them for a few years, just to sort of build political visibility,” he said. “I kept telling people, ‘Nobody’s gonna listen to us if they don’t see us!’ And then right around the same time, around ‘95, everything just kind of took off.”
“I got appointed to the Montgomery County Human Relations Commission by our then county executive, Doug Duncan, as an openly gay man,” Jacobs said. “Well, I had never been an openly gay man much of anything before then, but it was like, ‘Yeah, yeah, OK.’”
This seat on the Montgomery County Human Relations Commission gave Jacobs the ability to wield power to help those who needed it the most. He remembered that fighting for LGBTQ student rights in schools was a particularly big hurdle that seems all too familiar today.
“Through an odd combination of coincidences, I, with Bonnie Berger, launched the Safe Schools movement in Montgomery County to protect LGBT kids in schools, and that turned into a three ring media circus,” he began to explain. “I mean, you want to see ugly? It included getting interviewed on a radio station with a Christian fundamentalist woman who said right to my face, ‘You know, gay men on average die at age 40.’ I was like, ‘Yeah, I’m already past that. So is my partner.’”
Despite the “three ring circus,” Jacobs and Berger were able to make progress.
“We did get it passed, it got swept under the rug, but eventually we got more supportive schools,” he said. “But then I sort of somehow got involved more on the state level with the statewide organization that was then ironically called FreeState Justice.”
This then marked a shift from fighting for local policy changes to state policy changes, which Jacobs foresaw as the next step to gaining equality.
“We were desperately trying to get domestic partnership benefits,” Jacobs explained. “Nobody could get married. If you’re not married to somebody, you’re a stranger, whether that’s in Maryland or even in the District. Unless you’re registered domestic partners, you’re nothing [in the eyes of the law].”
Jacobs used his platform to inform the queer public. Without legal domestic partnerships he understood that everything two people in love had, regardless of gender and gender expression, could be taken away in an instant.
He started sharing his information by tabling and talking with members of the LGBTQ community about the state of things wherever he could, highlighting what could happen if a partner dies.
“Sometimes my husband and I, well, I would get a booth at Pride, and my husband would come with me and swelter. Sometimes my son would come with us and swelter, and it just started growing,” Jacobs said.
He would share stories about how having legally binding documents can protect a couple even against the most hateful of people.
“I had these two elderly women, one of whom was sick and we knew her partner was going to die,” he began. “I don’t remember how old she was, but she was sick. She died not long thereafter, and my client, the surviving client, went into the funeral home, and they gave her a hard time. ‘Who the hell are you? Why do you think you can make decisions?’”
“And she literally called me up and told me this. She [then] brought in a manila envelope with all the documents that we had done and pulled out the funeral document that named her, of course, as the power behind the throne, and handed it over to the funeral director, and he went ‘Oh, OK. That’s all we need.’”
While many of the issues that had plagued same-sex couples prior to Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case that gave same-sex couples the same protections as opposite-sex couples, went away, Jacobs made it very clear legally being seen as a couple is the strongest defense to protecting everything you and your partner own.
“There’s certainly more acceptance because of marriage equality,” Jacobs explained. “And I will, without violating client confidentiality, tell you there are numerous clients that I have said to, ‘You need to get married. Yes, we’re doing these great documents, but you need to get married too for this and this and this and this reason.’ The right documents and a wedding license are a very powerful combination. Neither one by itself is foolproof, and marriage gets you a lot of things, but doesn’t get you everything.”
To summarize an extremely rewarding and impactful career Jacobs offers this piece of advice: “If I could be remembered for anything it would be ‘Get married, and get married while you can, because someday you’re going to need it, want it!” Jacobs said he plans to retire effective Dec. 27.
District of Columbia
D.C. Council gives first approval to amended PrEP insurance bill
Removes weakening language after concerns raised by AIDS group
The D.C. Council voted unanimously on Feb. 3 to approve a bill on its first of two required votes that requires health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.
The vote to approve the PrEP D.C. Amendment Act came immediately after the 13-member Council voted unanimously again to approve an amendment that removed language in the bill added last month by the Council’s Committee on Health that would require insurers to fully cover only one PrEP drug.
The amendment, introduced jointly by Council members Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), who first introduced the bill in February 2025, and Christina Henderson (I-At-Large), who serves as chair of the Health Committee, requires insurers to cover all U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved PrEP drugs.
Under its rules, the D.C. Council must vote twice to approve all legislation, which must be signed by the D.C. mayor and undergo a 30-day review by Congress before it takes effect as a D.C. law.
Given its unanimous “first reading” vote of approval on Feb. 3, Parker told the Washington Blade he was certain the Council would approve the bill on its second and final vote expected in about two weeks.
Among those who raised concerns about the earlier version of the bill was Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, who sent messages to all 13 Council members urging them to remove the language added by the Committee on Health requiring insurers to cover just one PrEP drug.
The change made by the committee, Schmid told Council members, “would actually reduce PrEP options for D.C. residents that are required by current federal law, limit patient choice, and place D.C. behind states that have enacted HIV prevention policies designed to remain in effect regardless of any federal changes.”
Schmid told the Washington Blade that although coverage requirements for insurers are currently provided through coverage standards recommended in the U.S. Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, AIDS advocacy organizations have called on D.C. and states to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP in the event that the federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced or ended federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.
“The sticking point was the language in the markup that insurers only had to cover one regimen of PrEP,” Parker told the Blade in a phone interview the night before the Council vote. “And advocates thought that moved the needle back in terms of coverage access, and I agree with them,” he said.
In anticipation that the Council would vote to approve the amendment and the underlying bill, Parker, the Council’s only gay member, added, “I think this is a win for our community. And this is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS.”
During the Feb. 3 Council session, Henderson called on her fellow Council members to approve both the amendment she and Parker had introduced and the bill itself. But she did not say why her committee approved the changes that advocates say weakened the bill and that her and Parker’s amendment would undo. Schmid speculated that pressure from insurance companies may have played a role in the committee change requiring coverage of only one PrEP drug.
“My goal for advancing the ‘PrEP DC Amendment Act’ is to ensure that the District is building on the progress made in reducing new HIV infections every year,” Henderson said in a statement released after the Council vote. “On Friday, my office received concerns from advocates and community leaders about language regarding PrEP coverage,” she said.
“My team and I worked with Council member Parker, community leaders, including the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute and Whitman-Walker, and the Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking, to craft a solution that clarifies our intent and provides greater access to these life-saving drugs for District residents by reducing consumer costs for any PrEP drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,” her statement concludes.
In his own statement following the Council vote, Schmid thanked Henderson and Parker for initiating the amendment to improve the bill. “This will provide PrEP users with the opportunity to choose the best drug that meets their needs,” he said. “We look forward to the bill’s final reading and implementation.”
Maryland
4th Circuit dismisses lawsuit against Montgomery County schools’ pronoun policy
Substitute teacher Kimberly Polk challenged regulation in 2024
A federal appeals court has ruled Montgomery County Public Schools did not violate a substitute teacher’s constitutional rights when it required her to use students’ preferred pronouns in the classroom.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision it released on Jan. 28 ruled against Kimberly Polk.
The policy states that “all students have the right to be referred to by their identified name and/or pronoun.”
“School staff members should address students by the name and pronoun corresponding to the gender identity that is consistently asserted at school,” it reads. “Students are not required to change their permanent student records as described in the next section (e.g., obtain a court-ordered name and/or new birth certificate) as a prerequisite to being addressed by the name and pronoun that corresponds to their identified name. To the extent possible, and consistent with these guidelines, school personnel will make efforts to maintain the confidentiality of the student’s transgender status.”
The Washington Post reported Polk, who became a substitute teacher in Montgomery County in 2021, in November 2022 requested a “religious accommodation, claiming that the policy went against her ‘sincerely held religious beliefs,’ which are ‘based on her understanding of her Christian religion and the Holy Bible.’”
U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in January 2025 dismissed Polk’s lawsuit that she filed in federal court in Beltsville. Polk appealed the decision to the 4th Circuit.
District of Columbia
Norton hailed as champion of LGBTQ rights
D.C. congressional delegate to retire after 36 years in U.S. House
LGBTQ rights advocates reflected on D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton’s longstanding advocacy and support for LGBTQ rights in Congress following her decision last month not to run for re-election this year.
Upon completing her current term in office in January 2027, Norton, a Democrat, will have served 18 two-year terms and 36 years in her role as the city’s non-voting delegate to the U.S. House.
LGBTQ advocates have joined city officials and community leaders in describing Norton as a highly effective advocate for D.C. under the city’s limited representation in Congress where she could not vote on the House floor but stood out in her work on House committees and moving, powerful speeches on the House floor.
“During her more than three decades in Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton has been a champion for the District of Columbia and the LGBTQ+ community,” said David Stacy, vice president of government affairs for the Human Rights Campaign, the D.C.-based national LGBTQ advocacy organization.
“When Congress blocked implementation of D.C.’s domestic partnership registry, Norton led the fight to allow it to go into effect,” Stacey said. “When President Bush tried to ban marriage equality in every state and the District, Norton again stood up in opposition. And when Congress blocked HIV prevention efforts, Norton worked to end that interference in local control,” he said.

In reflecting the sentiment of many local and national LGBTQ advocates familiar with Norton’s work, Stacy added, “We have been lucky to have such an incredible champion. As her time in Congress comes to an end, we honor her extraordinary impact in the nation’s capital and beyond by standing together in pride and gratitude.”
Norton has been among the lead co-sponsors and outspoken supporters of LGBTQ rights legislation introduced in Congress since first taking office, including the currently pending Equality Act, which would ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Activists familiar with Norton’s work also point out that she has played a lead role in opposing and helping to defeat anti-LGBTQ legislation. In 2018, Norton helped lead an effort to defeat a bill called the First Amendment Defense Act introduced by U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), which Norton said included language that could “gut” D.C.’s Human Rights Act’s provisions banning LGBTQ discrimination.
Norton pointed to a provision in the bill not immediately noticed by LGBTQ rights organizations that would define D.C.’s local government as a federal government entity and allow potential discrimination against LGBTQ people based on a “sincerely held religious belief.”
“This bill is the latest outrageous Republican attack on the District, focusing particularly on our LGBT community and the District’s right to self-government,” Norton said shortly after the bill was introduced. “We will not allow Republicans to discriminate against the LGBT community under the guise of religious liberty,” she said. Records show supporters have not secured the votes to pass it in several congressional sessions.
In 2011, Norton was credited with lining up sufficient opposition to plans by some Republican lawmakers to attempt to overturn D.C.’s same-sex marriage law, that the Council passed and the mayor signed in 2010.
In 2015, Norton also played a lead role opposing attempts by GOP members of Congress to overturn another D.C. law protecting LGBTQ students at religious schools, including the city’s Catholic University, from discrimination such as the denial of providing meeting space for an LGBTQ organization.
More recently, in 2024 Norton again led efforts to defeat an attempt by Republican House members to amend the D.C. budget bill that Congress must pass to eliminate funding for the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs and to prohibit the city from using its funds to enforce the D.C. Human Rights Act in cases of discrimination against transgender people.
“The Republican amendment that would prohibit funds from being used to enforce anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination regulations and the amendment to defund the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs are disgraceful attempts, in themselves, to discriminate against D.C.’s LGBTQ+ community while denying D.C. residents the limited governance over their local affairs to which they are entitled,” Norton told the Washington Blade.
In addition to pushing for LGBTQ supportive laws and opposing anti-LGBTQ measures Norton has spoken out against anti-LGBTQ hate crimes and called on the office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. in 2020 to more aggressively prosecute anti-LGBTQ hate crimes.

“There is so much to be thankful for Eleanor Holmes Norton’s many years of service to all the citizens and residents of the District of Columbia,” said John Klenert, a member of the board of the LGBTQ Victory Fund. “Whether it was supporting its LGBTQ+ people for equal rights, HIV health issues, home rule protection, statehood for all 700,000 people, we could depend on her,” he said.
Ryan Bos, executive director of Capital Pride Alliance, the group that organizes D.C.’s annual LGBTQ Pride events, called Norton a “staunch” LGBTQ community ally and champion for LGBTQ supportive legislation in Congress.
“For decades, Congresswoman Norton has marched in the annual Capital Pride Parade, showing her pride and using her platform to bring voice and visibility in our fight to advance civil rights, end discrimination, and affirm the dignity of all LGBTQ+ people” Bos said. “We will be forever grateful for her ongoing advocacy and contributions to the LGBTQ+ movement.”
Howard Garrett, president of D.C.’s Capital Stonewall Democrats, called Norton a “consistent and principled advocate” for equality throughout her career. “She supported LGBTQ rights long before it was politically popular, advancing nondiscrimination protections and equal protection under the law,” he said.
“Eleanor was smart, tough, and did not suffer fools gladly,” said Rick Rosendall, former president of the D.C. Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance. “But unlike many Democratic politicians a few decades ago who were not reliable on LGBTQ issues, she was always right there with us,” he said. “We didn’t have to explain our cause to her.”
Longtime D.C. gay Democratic activist Peter Rosenstein said he first met Norton when she served as chair of the New York City Human Rights Commission. “She got her start in the civil rights movement and has always been a brilliant advocate for equality,” Rosenstein said.
“She fought for women and for the LGBTQ community,” he said. “She always stood strong with us in all the battles the LGBTQ community had to fight in Congress. I have been honored to know her, thank her for her lifetime of service, and wish her only the best in a hard-earned retirement.”
