Connect with us

National

Obama admin. to SCOTUS: Let us keep enforcing ‘Don’t Ask’

Justice Dept. files brief defending stay against injunction

Published

on

The Obama administration on Wednesday continued its defense of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in court by filing a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court asking for continued enforcement of the military’s gay ban while an appellate court considers its constitutionality.

In the document, Acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Kumar Katyal argues in favor of a U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ stay against an injunction that would have prohibited enforcement of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Katyal argues that the stay is necessary because the injunction would cause “the government the kind of irreparable injury that routinely forms the basis for a stay pending appeal.”

“This case does not present the sort of exceptional circumstances that would warrant interference with an interim order of the court of appeals,” Katyal writes. “That court’s stay simply preserves the status quo pending its consideration of the merits of this facial challenge to a federal statute governing military affairs that has been in force for 17 years.”

The injunction was issued last month by U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips after she ruled “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” violated gay service members freedom of speech and due process rights under the U.S. Constitution.

Among other reasons for maintaining the stay, Katyal argues that Log Cabin fails to show reasonable probability that the Supreme Court would take up the case if the Ninth Circuit reverses Phillips’ decision. Additionally, Katyal argues that the injunction would “short-circuit the Executive Branch’s review process” and the work of Pentagon in developing a plan to implement repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“Without sufficient time for such training and guidance, an immediate court-ordered repeal of the statute would risk disruption to military commanders and service members as they carry out their missions, especially in zones of active combat,” Katyal writes.

Last week, lawyers representing Log Cabin Republicans, which filed the litigation against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 2004, asked the Supreme Court to lift the Ninth Circuit’s stay on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” injunction. The Ninth Circuit had granted the stay after the Justice Department asked for the order and appealed a district court’s decision against the law to the appellate court.

The decision on whether to vacate the stay is now before U.S. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, who’s the circuit justice for the Ninth Circuit. Whether the entire Supreme Court will be involved in the decision on vacating the order is up to Kennedy. The justice may decide for himself of refer the application to his colleagues on the bench.

A source familiar with the case, who spoke on condition of anonymity, estimated that the Supreme Court would make a decision on whether or not to vacate the stay in a week.

Doug NeJaine, who’s gay and a law professor at Loyola Law School, predicted that the Supreme Court would side in favor of the U.S. government and allow the stay to continue.

“Preserving the status quo — both in affirming the Ninth Circuit and maintaining the stay pending litigation on the merits — is the least controversial thing to do,” NeJaime said. “Plus, I doubt that the Court wants to get involved in the merits of the policy at this point, which is what analyzing the stay question (and particularly the likelihood of success on the merits prong) would require.”

Fred Sainz, the Human Rights Campaign”s vice president of communications, said Log Cabin “did the right thing” by asking the Supreme Court to lift the stay on the injunction against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and said the organization and its attorneys “have a responsibility to use every tool in their legal arsenal.”

“At the very least, it continues to bring attention to this issue and puts the Justice Department under enormous pressure if they choose to continue defending a law that has [now] been ruled unconstitutional,” Sainz said.

Download a copy of the Justice Department’s brief to the Supreme Court here.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Advocacy groups issue US travel advisory ahead of World Cup

Renee Good’s death in Minneapolis among incidents cited

Published

on

(Photo by fifg/Bigstock)

More than 100 organizations have issued a travel advisory for the U.S. ahead of the 2026 World Cup.

The World Cup will take place in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico from June 11-July 19.

“In light of the deteriorating human rights situation in the United States and in the absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA, host cities, or the U.S. government, the undersigned organizations are issuing this travel advisory for fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States for the June 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown,” reads the advisory that the Council for Global Equality and other groups that include the American Civil Liberties Union issued on April 23.  “The impacts of these policies vary by locality.”

“While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all, those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm when traveling to and/or within the United States,” it adds. “This travel advisory calls on fans, players, journalists, and other visitors to exercise caution.”

The advisory specifically mentions Renee Good.

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent on Jan. 7 shot and killed her in Minneapolis. Good, 37, left behind her wife and three children.

The full advisory can be read here.

Continue Reading

State Department

Democracy Forward files FOIA request for State Department bathroom policy records

April 20 memo outlined anti-transgender rule

Published

on

(Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress)

Democracy Forward on Tuesday filed a Freedom of Information Act request for records on the State Department’s new bathroom policy.

A memo titled “Updates Regarding Biological Sex and Intimate Spaces, Including Restrooms” that the State Department issued on April 20 notes employees can no longer use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.

“The administration affirms that there are two sexes — male and female — and that federal facilities should operate on this objective and longstanding basis to ensure consistency, privacy, and safety in shared spaces,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggot told the Daily Signal, a conservative news website that first reported on the memo. “In line with President Trump’s executive order this provides clear, uniform guidance to the department by grounding policy in biological sex as determined at birth.”

President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. The sweeping directive also ordered federal government agencies to “effectuate this policy by taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity.”

Democracy Forward’s FOIA request that the Washington Blade exclusively obtained on Tuesday is specifically seeking a copy of the memo that details the State Department’s new bathroom policy. Democracy Forward has also requested “all” memo-specific communications between the State Department’s Bureau of Global Public Affairs and the Daily Signal from April 1-21.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

House Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill

Measures would restrict federal funding for LGBTQ-affirming schools

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Republicans have been gaining ground in reshaping education policy to be less inclusive toward LGBTQ students at the state level, and now they are turning their focus to Capitol Hill.

Some GOP lawmakers are pushing for a nationwide “Don’t Say Gay” bill, doubling down on their commitment to being the party of “traditional family values” by excluding anyone who does not identify with their sex at birth.

The largest anti-LGBTQ education legislation to reach the House chamber is House Bill 2616 — the Parental Rights Over the Education and Care of Their Kids Act, or the PROTECT Kids Act. The PROTECT Kids Act, proposed by U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), and co-sponsored by U.S. Reps. Burgess Owens (R-Utah), Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Robert Onder (R-Mo.), and Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), would require any public elementary and middle schools that receive federal funding to require parental consent to change a child’s gender expression in school.

The bill, which was discussed during Tuesday’s House Rules Committee hearing, would specifically require any schools that get federal money from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 — which was created to minimize financial discrepancies in education for low-income students — to get parental approval before identifying any child’s gender identity as anything other than what was provided to the school initially. This includes getting approval before allowing children to use their preferred locker room or bathroom.

It reads that any school receiving this funding “shall obtain parental consent before changing a covered student’s (1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or (2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.”

LGBTQ rights advocates have criticized both national and state efforts to require parental permission to use a child’s preferred gender identity, as it raises issues of at-home safety — especially if the home is not LGBTQ-affirming — and could lead to the outing of transgender or gender-curious students.

A follow-up bill, HB 2617, proposed by Owens, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, prevents the use of federal funding to “advance concepts related to gender ideology,” using the definition from President Donald Trump’s 2025 Executive Order 14168, making that an enshrined definition in law of sex rather than just by executive order. There is also a bill making its way through the senate with the same text— Senate Bill 2251.

Advocates have also criticized this follow-up legislation, as it would restrict school staff — including teachers and counselors — from acknowledging trans students’ identities or providing any support. They have said that this kind of isolation can worsen mental health outcomes for LGBTQ youth and allows for education to be politicized rather than being based in reality.

David Stacy, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president of government affairs, called this legislation out for using LGBTQ children as political pawns in an ideology fight — one that could greatly harm the safety of these children if passed.

“Trans kids are not a political agenda — they are students who deserve safety and affirmation at school like anyone else,” Stacy said in a statement. “Despite the many pressing issues facing our nation, House Republicans continue their bizarre obsession with trans people. H.R. 2616 does not protect children. It targets them. This bill is cruel, and we’re prepared to fight it.”

This is similar to Florida House Bills 1557 and 1069, referred to as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill and “Don’t Say They” bill, respectively, restricting classroom discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity, prohibiting the use of pronouns consistent with one’s gender identity, expanding book banning procedures, and censoring health curriculum.

The American Civil Liberties Union is tracking 233 bills related to restricting student and educator rights in the U.S.

Continue Reading

Popular