News
62 lawmakers blast anti-gay DOJ filing in bicameral letter
Congressional Democrats say brief ‘violates our nation’s ideals of liberty and justice for all’


Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) is leading 62 congressional Democrats in objecting to an anti-gay DOJ filing. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
A group of 62 Democrats from both chambers of Congress is blasting the U.S. Justice Department for a recent court filing arguing lesbians, gays and bisexuals have no protections under existing federal civil rights law.
In a letter dated Aug. 7 and made public Tuesday, the lawmakers assert the Justice Department’s recent friend-of-the-court brief in the case of Zarda V. Altitude Express is “not only contrary to existing law, but violates our nation’s ideals of liberty and justice for all.”
The missive was led by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), who’s gay and a co-chair of the LGBT Equality Caucus, and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.).
“Any discrimination is completely unacceptable,” the letter says. “It tears at the fabric of our great nation and does not move us forward; it takes us backward. We urge the Department of Justice to reverse its position and to refrain from arguing against protections for LGBT people in any future Title VII cases dealing with the issue of whether sex discrimination includes discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”
Late last month, the Justice Department under U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions argued in a voluntary filing before the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 affords no protections against sexual orientation discrimination.
As the letter points out, that reasoning is contrary to the decisions of a growing number of district courts as well as the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which have determined Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination in the workplace applies to cases of discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual people.
“This reflects a growing consensus that discrimination against people based on their sexual orientation cannot be understood without reference to sex,” the letter says. “To argue the opposite defies any reasonable interpretation of what sex discrimination means.”
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the U.S. agency charged with enforcing federal employment non-discrimination laws, has also found sexual orientation discrimination is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII.
However, the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has determined existing law against sex discrimination affords no protections to lesbian, gay and bisexual people. That has created a split among the circuit courts and prompted the LGBT legal group Lambda Legal to plan to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for a nationwide resolution to the issue.
Notably, most of the seven openly LGB members of Congress who are also co-chairs of the LGBT Equality Caucus didn’t sign the letter. Names that are absent are Reps. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Mark Takano (D-Calif.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). The only gay members of Congress who signed the letter were Cicilline, Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
The Washington Blade has placed a request with the Justice Department seeking comment on the congressional letter.
India
Madras High Court says families are possible outside marriage
May 22 ruling could set important legal precedent in India

In a significant moment for India’s LGBTQ community ahead of Pride month, the Madras High Court on May 22 affirmed people can form families outside of marriage.
The decision, handed down by Justices G.R. Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayanan, emphasized “marriage is not the sole mode to found a family,” recognizing the concept of “chosen families” as a well-established principle in LGBTQ jurisprudence.
A two judge Madras High Court panel ordered the release of a 25-year-old lesbian woman who had been forcibly separated from her partner and subjected to harassment by her birth family.
The Madras High Court sharply criticized the local police for their mishandling of the case, condemning their decision to force the woman back to her parents against her will. The two judges denounced the police’s “rank inaction” and insensitivity, emphasizing that government officials, particularly law enforcement, are obligated to respond swiftly and appropriately to complaints from LGBTQ people, ensuring their rights and safety are upheld.
The Madras High Court expressed unease with the term “queer,” noting its dictionary definitions as “strange” or “odd.” The judges questioned the appropriateness of the label in the context of describing LGBTQ identities, urging sensitivity in language to reflect the community’s dignity and rights.
“For a homosexual individual, their sexual orientation is natural and normal,” said the judges. “There is nothing strange about such inclinations. Why then should they be labeled queer?”
The Madras High Court judges observed that not all parents embrace their children’s identities, unfavorably comparing the detained woman’s mother to late-Justice Leila Seth, who publicly supported her son’s sexual orientation. The panel highlighted Seth’s acceptance as a model for familial understanding, underscoring the need for greater societal compassion toward LGBTQ people.
“The mother of the detenue is no Leila Seth,” said the court. “We understand her desire for her daughter to live a conventional heterosexual life, marry, and settle down. However, as an adult, the detenue is entitled to choose her own path.”
The Madras High Court emphasized the concept of “family” must be understood expansively, citing the Supreme Court marriage equality case and other precedents. These international guidelines affirm that all people, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, are entitled to the full spectrum of human rights, reinforcing the court’s stance on recognizing chosen families within the LGBTQ community.
“While the Supriyo case may not have legalized marriage between same-sex couples, they can very well form a family,” the court said in its order. “The concept of ‘chosen family’ is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence. The petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family.”
The Madras High Court referenced Supriyo Chakraborty v. Union of India, which is the marriage equality case on which the Supreme Court ruled in 2023.
The Supreme Court in that ruling declined to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples, but recognized the rights of queer people to form families and urged the government to explore civil union protections, bolstering the court’s call for an expanded understanding of family.
The Madras High Court invoked landmark rulings, including NALSA v. Union of India (2014), which affirmed the right to self-identify as one’s gender, Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), which decriminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations, and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018), which upheld the right to marry by choice as a fundamental right. The two judges reaffirmed sexual orientation is an individual choice, falling within the ambit of personal liberty protected under Article 21 of the constitution.
Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, stating no person shall be deprived of these rights except through lawful procedure. This fundamental right has been expansively interpreted by courts to encompass dignity, privacy, and autonomy, including protections for sexual orientation and other individual identities.
Souvik Saha, an LGBTQ activist and founder of People for Change, a leading Indian advocacy group, described the Madras High Court’s recognition of chosen families as both a relief and a validation of the community’s lived realities.
“As the founder of Jamshedpur Queer Circle and someone who has worked closely with LGBTQ+ individuals navigating rejection, violence, and social isolation, for decades, queer, and trans persons in India have built nurturing ecosystems outside their biological families — often due to rejection, abuse, or lack of acceptance,” said Saha. “This concept of ‘chosen family’ is not new to us; it’s a survival mechanism, a source of healing, and a space where we find dignity, belonging, and love. The fact that the judiciary now formally acknowledges these relationships marks a progressive and humane shift in how family is legally and socially understood.”
Saha shared the story of S, a transgender man from Jamshedpur whose biological family disowned him at 17.
Finding refuge with a queer couple who became his guardians, S received emotional support, celebrated milestones like birthdays, and was guided through education and gender-affirming healthcare. “Isn’t that family?” asked Saha.
Saha told the Washington Blade the Madras High Court’s ruling sparks hope for legal reforms; particularly in securing adoption, inheritance, and caregiving rights for queer people. He said the decision affirms that queer lives are not deviant but diverse, vibrant, and capable of forming loving, responsible families. Most crucially, Saha noted, it sends a powerful message to queer youth in Jamshedpur and other smaller cities that their lives and relationships are valid and valued.
“This ruling is a step forward, but we must be honest. Legal rulings alone won’t change police behavior unless they are followed by systemic structural reforms,” said Saha. “Policing in India is still deeply patriarchal, casteist, and heteronormative. Many officers still view LGBTQ identities as criminal or immoral, even after Section 377 was struck down in 2018.”
Saha said mandatory sensitization programs in every police academy are needed to transform attitudes. He said the inclusion of queer rights in law enforcement curricula — beyond token workshops — are also important. Saha added the recruitment of LGBTQ liaison officers and the formation of compliant mechanisms at the district level is needed.
“This ruling is a strong message from the judiciary, but unless the Ministry of Home Affairs and state police departments institutionalize this into practice, change will remain slow and uneven,” said Saha.
Baltimore
More than 15K people attend Baltimore Trans Pride
Baltimore Safe Haven organized annual event

More than 15,000 people attended Baltimore Safe Haven’s annual Trans Pride on Saturday.
“Last year we had maybe 2,500, and the year before that, we had 5,000,” Renee Lau, administrative assistant for special projects coordinator for Baltimore Safe Haven, said. “In today’s political climate, it’s absolutely amazing.”
Lau said allies and other groups “went into hiding” for about a month or two after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, but then all at once, different organizations started to reach out.
“The community has really come together to support us,” Lau said. “It was a fun, exciting day.”
Baltimore Safe Haven Executive Director Iya Dammons in a press release said the “historic turnout” showed the transgender community’s strength, as well as their unity to fight for justice and equality for all LGBTQ people.
At the event, attendees were seen waving flags and shouting “Trans Lives Matter,” showing their support for the community.
On Friday, before Trans Pride, Baltimore Safe Haven opened their new building to the public, gathering notable attendees like the Baltimore City Council President Zeke Cohan, Council Member Antonio Glover, and representatives from the Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation.
“(It) was historic in itself because … we’re the only direct service providers for people in the LGBT community,” Lau said.
Providing housing for 18- to 24-year-olds, Lau said the new building also serves as a community hub and has office spaces for workers.
With only a few hiccups of arguments between attendees and fixing street blockades during Trans Pride, Lau said the event showed what the community can do.
“It was amazing that so many people came out and had that much fun. We were all giddy by Sunday morning,” Lau said. “(It gave) Safe Haven exposure and continuity. We are not just an LGBT organization, we are an organization that supports the entire community.”
National
Baldwin, Pocan named on alleged Minn. shooter’s target lists
Gunman killed state lawmaker, husband on Saturday

U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin and U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan, Democrats of Wisconsin, were named on lists of targets belonging to the man suspected of killing Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband and of injuring Minnesota state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife.
The Hoffmans sustained multiple gunshot wounds and are reportedly in serious but stable condition.
Vance Boelter, the suspect, was apprehended on Sunday in connection with the shootings, which occurred on Saturday. He faces federal murder and stalking charges as well as state-level murder and attempted murder charges.
“Senator Baldwin was informed by law enforcement that she was included on the alleged shooter’s list of names,” Baldwin’s Communications Director Eli Rosen told Channel3000.com. “She is grateful for law enforcement’s swift action to keep the community safe and remains focused on the things that matter most here: honoring the legacy and life of Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, praying for the other victims who are fighting for their lives, and condemning this abhorrent, senseless political violence.”
“I recently heard that my name was in one of the Minnesota shooting suspect’s notebooks and I’m appreciative that law enforcement apprehended the suspect,” Pocan said in a statement to Channel3000.com. “I will not back down in the face of terror, however, we as elected officials, must do better to lower the temperature. That said, my schedule remains unchanged.”
The news outlet reported on Monday that Baldwin’s name appeared on a list of 70 targets, while Pocan’s name was found on additional documents. The senator and congressman are both openly LGBTQ.
Democratic U.S. Reps. Greg Landsman (Ohio), Hillary Schotlen (Mich.), Veronica Escobar (Texas), and Joaquin Castro (Texas) also confirmed that their names appeared in notebooks recovered from Boelter’s vehicle.
Other Democrats who were reportedly targeted but whose offices have not yet provided confirmation as of Tuesday afternoon include LGBTQ congresswoman Angie Craig, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, U.S. Sen. Tina Smith, U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, and Attorney General Keith Ellison, all from Minnesota, along with U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, U.S. Rep. Nikki Budzinski of Illinois, and U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri.
Walz called the shootings a “politically motivated assassination.”