Connect with us

District of Columbia

Senate passes separate bill to avert $1.1 billion cut to D.C. budget

Bipartisan measure prompts Democrats to back GOP funding measure

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

In a dramatic turn of events, the U.S. Senate at 6:30 p.m. on Friday passed a free-standing bill proposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) that calls for amending the Republican-backed budget reconciliation measure to add language eliminating the measure’s call for a $1.1 billion cut in the D.C. budget.

Schumer’s announcement on the Senate floor that the bill, which was introduced by U.S. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), had bipartisan support prompted eight other Democratic senators and one independent to join Schumer in voting for a motion enabling the GOP-backed budget measure to clear a Democratic filibuster requiring 60 votes to overcome.

The cloture motion to end the filibuster passed by a close margin of 62 to 38, with 37 Democrats who strongly opposed the GOP budget measure voting against cloture. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was the only GOP senator to vote against cloture.  

The Senate then voted along partisan lines to approve the budget reconciliation measure that still includes the $1.1 billion D.C. budget cut provision in an action that averted a federal government shutdown that would have begun at 12:01 a.m. on Saturday, March 15.

Schumer pointed out in the Senate debate over the budget measure that the U.S. House of Representatives, which approved the budget measure containing the $1.1 billion D.C. budget cut four days earlier, will now also have to vote on the freestanding bill exempting D.C. from the House-initiated budget cut when it returns from its recess on March 24.

According to Schumer and others supporting the Collins bill, the bill enjoys bipartisan support in the House, which some political observers say is expected to pass the bill.

The Senate passed the Collins bill by voice vote without a roll call vote being taken after the Senate approved the budget reconciliation measure. 

The House budget reconciliation bill passed March 11 broke from longtime past practices for budget bills by declaring D.C. a federal agency and subjecting it to what D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowler and city officials called an unjustified city budget cut that would have a “devastating” impact on D.C. residents.

The unexpected budget cut, if not reversed now by the House, would require the city to make large scale cuts in its current fiscal year 2025 budget that would impact a wide range of city programs, including programs impacting the LGBTQ community, according to observers.

In his remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer said he agreed with his Democratic colleagues who voted against the cloture motion that the GOP backed budget conciliation bill, which is backed by President Donald Trump, is a bad bill that will be harmful to the country.  

“For sure the Republican bill is a terrible option,” Shumer said on the Senate Floor on Thursday. “But I believe allowing Donald Trump to take … much more power via a government shutdown is a far worse option,” the Washington Post quoted him as saying.

Among those who chose not to join Schumer in voting for cloture to end the filibuster and allow the GOP budget measure to be approved were U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the Senate’s only openly lesbian member, and the two Democratic senators from Maryland and Virginia.

But each of them spoke out strongly in favor of the Collins bill to exempt D.C. from the $1.1 billion budget cut.

D.C. officials had initially asked senators to amend the budget reconciliation measure itself to take out the provision calling for the D.C. budget cut. But such an amendment would have been far less likely to pass, and it would have required the House to approve it. With a House vote on that not likely to happen until March 24, the deadline would have been missed to avoid a government shutdown. 

Although Collins introduced the freestanding bill in cooperation with Schumer and with strong support from U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Senate observers believe the Collins bill would not have received as much support from Senate Republicans if Schumer had not worked out a deal with Senate GOP leaders to garner enough Democratic votes to end the filibuster and secure passage of the GOP budget reconciliation measure. 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

U.S. Attorney’s Office drops hate crime charge in anti-gay assault

Case remains under investigation and ‘further charges’ could come

Published

on

(Photo by chalabala/Bigstock)

D.C. police announced on Feb. 9 that they had arrested two days earlier on Feb. 7 a Germantown, Md., man on a charge of simple assault with a hate crime designation after the man allegedly assaulted a gay man at 14th and Q Streets, N.W., while using “homophobic slurs.”

But D.C. Superior Court records show that prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C., which prosecutes D.C. violent crime cases, charged the arrested man only with simple assault without a hate crime designation.

In response to a request by the Washington Blade for the reason why the hate crime designation was dropped, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office provided this response: “We continue to investigate this matter and make no mistake: should the evidence call for further charges, we will not hesitate to charge them.” 

In a statement announcing the arrest in this case, D.C. police stated, “On Saturday, February 7, 2026, at approximately 7:45 p.m. the victim and suspect were in the 1500 block of 14th Street, Northwest. The suspect requested a ‘high five’ from the victim. The victim declined and continued walking,” the statement says.

“The suspect assaulted the victim and used homophobic slurs,” the police statement continues. “The suspect was apprehended by responding officers.”

It adds that 26-year-old Dean Edmundson of Germantown, Md. “was arrested and charged with Simple Assault (Hate/Bias).” The statement also adds, “A designation as a hate crime by MPD does not mean that prosecutors will prosecute it as a hate crime.”

Under D.C.’s Bias Related Crime Act of 1989, penalties for crimes motivated by prejudice against individuals based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, and homelessness can be enhanced by a court upon conviction by one and a half times greater than the penalty of the underlying crime.

Prosecutors in the past both in D.C. and other states have said they sometimes decide not to include a hate crime designation in assault cases if they don’t think the evidence is sufficient to obtain a conviction by a jury. In some instances, prosecutors have said they were concerned that a skeptical jury might decide to find a defendant not guilty of the underlying assault charge if they did not believe a motive of hate was involved.

A more detailed arrest affidavit filed by D.C. police in Superior Court appears to support the charge of a hate crime designation.

“The victim stated that they refused to High-Five Defendant Edmondson, which, upon that happening, Defendant Edmondson 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 continues. “The victim stated that they felt offended and that they were also gay,” it says.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Capital Pride wins anti-stalking order against local activist

Darren Pasha claims action is linked to his criticism of Pride organizers

Published

on

Darren Pasha was ordered to stay 100 feet away from Capital Pride officials. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

A D.C. Superior Court judge on Feb. 6 partially approved an anti-stalking order against a local LGBTQ activist requested last October by the Capital Pride Alliance, the D.C.-based LGBTQ group that organizes the city’s annual Pride events.

The ruling by Judge Robert D. Okun requires Darren Pasha to stay at least 100 feet away from Capital Pride’s staff, board members, and volunteers until the time of a follow up court hearing he scheduled for April 17.

In  his ruling at the Feb. 6 hearing, which was virtual rather than held in-person at the courthouse, Okun said he had changed the distance that Capital Pride had requested for the stay-away, anti-stalking order from 200 yards to 100 feet. The court records show that the judge also denied a motion filed earlier by Pasha, who did not attend the hearing, to “quash” the Capital Pride civil case against him.   

Pasha told the Washington Blade he suffered an injury and damaged his mobile phone by falling off his scooter on the city’s snow-covered streets that prevented him from calling in to join the Feb. 6 court hearing.

In his own court filings without retaining an attorney, Pasha has strongly denied the stalking related allegations against him by Capital Pride, saying “no credible or admissible evidence has been provided” to show he engaged in any wrongdoing.

The Capital Pride complaint initially filed in court on Oct. 27, 2025, includes an 18-page legal brief outlining its allegations against Pasha and an additional 167-page addendum of “supporting exhibits” that includes multiple statements by witnesses whose names are blacked out. 

“Over the past year, Defendant Darren Pasha (“DSP”) has engaged in a sustained, and escalating course of conduct directed at CPA, including repeated and unwanted contact, harassment, intimidation, threats, manipulation, and coercive behavior targeting CPA staff, board members, volunteers, and affiliates,” the Capital Pride complaint states.

In his initial 16-page response to the complaint, Pasha says the Capital Pride complaint appears to be a form of retaliation against him for a dispute he has had with the organization and its then president, Ashley Smith, last year.

“It is evident that the document is replete with false, misleading, and unsubstantiated assertions,” he said of the complaint.

Smith, who has since resigned from his role as board president, did not respond to a request by the Blade for comment at the time the Capital Pride court complaint was filed against Pasha. 

Capital Pride Executive Director Ryan Bos and the attorney representing the group in its legal action against Pasha, Nick Harrison, did not immediately respond to a Blade request for comment on the judge’s Feb. 6 ruling.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. pays $500,000 to settle lawsuit brought by gay Corrections Dept. employee

Alleged years of verbal harassment, slurs, intimidation

Published

on

Deon Jones (Photo courtesy of the ACLU)

The D.C. government on Feb. 5 agreed to pay $500,000 to a gay D.C. Department of Corrections officer as a settlement to a lawsuit the officer filed in 2021 alleging he was subjected  to years of discrimination at his job because of his sexual orientation, according to a statement released by the American Civil Liberties Union of D.C.

The statement says the lawsuit, filed on behalf of Sgt. Deon Jones by the ACLU of D.C. and the law firm WilmerHale, alleged that the Department of Corrections, including supervisors and co-workers, “subjected Sgt. Jones to discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment because of his identity as a gay man, in violation of the D.C. Human Rights Act.”

Daniel Gleick, a spokesperson for D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, said the mayor’s office would have no comment on the lawsuit settlement. A spokesperson for the Office of the D.C. Attorney General, which represents the city against lawsuits, said the office has a longstanding policy of not commenting on litigation like the Deon Jones lawsuit.

Bowser and her high-level D.C. government appointees, including Japer Bowles, director of the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs, have spoken out against LGBTQ-related discrimination.   

“Jones, now a 28-year veteran of the Department and nearing retirement, faced years of verbal abuse and harassment from coworkers and incarcerated people alike, including anti-gay slurs, threats, and degrading treatment,”  the ACLU’s statement says.

“The prolonged mistreatment took a severe toll on Jones’s mental health, and he experienced depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and 15 anxiety attacks in 2021 alone,” it says.

“For years, I showed up to do my job with professionalism and pride, only to be targeted because of who I am,” Jones says in the ACLU  statement. “This settlement affirms that my pain mattered – and that creating hostile workplaces has real consequences,” he said.  

He added, “For anyone who is LGBTQ or living with a disability and facing workplace discrimination or retaliation, know this: you are not powerless. You have rights. And when you stand up, you can achieve justice.”

The settlement agreement, a link to which the ACLU provided in its statement announcing the settlement, states that plaintiff Jones agrees, among other things, that “neither the Parties’ agreement, nor the District’s offer to settle the case, shall in any way be construed as an admission by the District that it or any of its current or former employees, acted wrongfully with respect to Plaintiff or any other person, or that Plaintiff has any rights.”

Scott Michelman, the D.C. ACLU’s legal director said that type of disclaimer is typical for parties that agree to settle a lawsuit like this.

“But actions speak louder than words,” he told the Blade. “The fact that they are paying our client a half million dollars for the pervasive and really brutal harassment that he suffered on the basis of his identity for years is much more telling than their disclaimer itself,” he said.

The settlement agreement also says Jones would be required, as a condition for accepting the agreement, to resign permanently from his job at the Department of Corrections. ACLU spokesperson Andy Hoover said Jones has been on administrative leave since March 2022. Jones couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

“This is really something that makes sense on both sides,” Michelman said of the resignation requirements. “The environment had become so toxic the way he had been treated on multiple levels made it difficult to see how he could return to work there.”

Continue Reading

Popular