National
Lawyers cite procreation in defending Prop 8
Judges grill marriage ban supporters in televised court case
A lawyer defending California’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage told a three-judge federal appeals court panel Monday that the ban must be upheld to protect the institution of marriage, which he said is essential for procreation and child rearing.
In a hearing that lasted more than two hours, the panel of judges for the San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals fired sharp questions at lawyers backing and opposing Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that repealed the state’s same-sex marriage law.
But two of the three judges appeared to subject the lawyers defending Proposition 8 to greater scrutiny and a stronger challenge of their arguments. That led some legal observers to predict the liberal-leaning court would likely uphold a decision in August by a U.S. District Court judge declaring Prop 8 unconstitutional.
Judge Stephen Reinhardt, an appointee of President Jimmy Carter, is considered one of the court’s strongest liberals and is expected to act favorably toward the two same-sex couples challenging Prop 8 in a case known as Perry v. Schwarzenegger.
Judge Michael Hawkins, a Clinton appointee, is also considered a liberal with a likely favorable leaning toward the gay plaintiffs in the case. The third judge on the panel, N. Randy Smith, was appointed by President George W. Bush and served as chair of the Idaho Republican Party. Legal observers expect him to vote to uphold Prop 8.
Smith is a graduate of Brigham Young University and media reports identified him as a Mormon. The Mormon Church supported the passage of Prop 8 and received criticism from gay activists for encouraging church members to contribute millions of dollars into the Prop 8 election campaign.
Both the plaintiffs in the case — two same-sex couples who are challenging the gay marriage ban — and supporters of Prop 8 have said they would appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court if the Ninth Circuit appeals court rules against them. That would bring the question of whether gay marriage is protected by the Constitution before the high court for the first time.
“The key reason that marriage has existed at all in any society and at any time is that sexual relationships between men and women naturally produce children,” said Charles Cooper, one of two attorneys defending Proposition 8 before the appeals court hearing Monday.
Cooper sought to use the procreation element of traditional heterosexual marriage as one of several “rational” reasons why California could ban same-sex marriage without violating the U.S. Constitution.
U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker ruled in August that Proposition 8 violated the federal Constitution’s equal protection and due process clauses, in part, because there was no rational reason to deny marital rights to same-sex couples.
In his arguments, Cooper told the judges that when a relationship between a man and a woman becomes a sexual one, “society immediately has a vital interest in that.” Among other things, “society needs the creation of new life for the next generation,” he said.
Society’s vital interests are also threatened by the possibility of “unintentional and unwanted pregnancy” and single parent households in which children have “poorer outcomes,” he said.
“That sounds like a good argument for prohibiting divorce,” Judge Hawkins said, drawing laughter from the courtroom audience.
“But how does it relate to having two males or two females marry each other and raise children as they can in California and form a family unit where children have a happy, healthy home?” Hawkins asked. “I don’t understand how that argument says we ought to prohibit that.”
Cooper responded by reiterating his procreation argument. “The point and the question is whether or not the State of California has a rational reason for drawing a distinction between same-sex couples who cannot, without the intervention of a third party of the opposite sex, procreate, and opposite-sex couples who … can procreate.”
Theodore Olson, a prominent Republican attorney and constitutional law expert who surprised his GOP colleagues by joining the legal team challenging Proposition 8, strongly disputed claims that same-sex marriage would harm or inhibit procreation or the institution of marriage.
“Same-sex marriage is not going to discourage heterosexual people with heterosexual marriage,” he told the judges Monday. “It is not going to keep them from getting divorced. It is not going to have an effect at all on their choice about having children. On the other hand, the elimination of Proposition 8 cannot possibly hurt the heterosexual relationship at all,” he said.
While Olson argued the merits of why the appeals court should uphold the lower court’s finding that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional, attorney David Boies, a prominent Democrat who teamed up with Olsen in the legal challenge of Prop 8, argued that Prop 8 supporters lacked legal standing to appeal the lower court ruling.
At the time he issued his ruling in August overturning Prop 8 on constitutional grounds, Judge Walker said a decision by California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state’s attorney general, Jerry Brown, not to appeal his ruling meant it was unlikely that another party could emerge with legal standing to challenge Walker’s decision.
Walker issued a stay on his own ruling so that the appeals court would have a chance to determine whether the same-sex marriage ban should remain in effect during the appeals process. The Ninth Circuit court extended the stay until it issues its own decision in the case.
But at Monday’s hearing, the judges appeared sympathetic to Boies’ arguments that the conservative political advocacy groups that organized the election campaign for passage of Prop 8 in 2008 did not have legal standing to appeal the lower court ruling.
Boies noted that Prop 8 was a state law in the form of a state constitutional amendment that could only be defended in court at the appeals level by the state or an agent of the state.
A second attorney defending Prop 8 before the Ninth Circuit appeals court Monday argued that a deputy clerk who processes marriage licenses in California’s conservative leaning Imperial County had joined the defense team for the proposition. The attorney, Robert Tyler, told the judges that the deputy clerk was a legitimate representative of the state and thus had legal standing to appeal the case.
But Judge Hawkins appeared to join Boies in expressing strong doubt that the deputy clerk had such standing.
Hawkins and the other appeals court judges said Monday that they would issue a decision on the legal standing matter before they consider the case on its merits. If they determine the Prop 8 supporters and their legal team don’t have standing, they will send the case back to Judge Walker, who likely would order state officials to cease enforcing Prop 8.
However, Prop 8 backers would then be expected to immediately appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court and ask the high court to reinstate a stay to keep Prop 8 on the books until the Supreme Court issues its own decision in the case.
“I think the arguments made even clearer to all of us that the judges are wrestling with whether this litigation even can continue with the only party seeking to appeal being those who do not appear to have legally recognizable interests in this case,” said Jennifer Pizer, an attorney with Lambda Legal.
“So I would not be at all surprised if they decide that the appeal should not proceed” based on a lack of legal standing, Pizer said.
Meanwhile, one of the leading groups supporting Prop 8 issued a statement Monday denouncing Ninth Circuit Judge Reinhardt for refusing to recuse himself from the case because his wife is a prominent attorney with the ACLU who has worked to oppose Prop 8.
“This hearing makes a mockery of the federal judiciary,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. “Citizens are entitled to a guarantee of impartiality from their judiciary,” he said. “Yet here we have the spectacle of a federal appeals court justice ruling on a case in which his wife represents a group that is a participant.”
Reinhardt issued his own statement last month saying his wife’s views on the case would not detract from his ability to be fair and impartial in his ruling on the case.
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Pentagon expands testosterone screening as trans troops face hormone therapy restrictions
Defense Department says updated guidelines to be issued shortly
The Pentagon has announced that new clinical guidance will be released establishing mandatory testosterone deficiency screening for active-duty and reserve cisgender male service members ages 30 and older, advancing a policy that expands hormone-related care for cisgender troops.
The Defense Department said the existing clinical guidelines, which are not currently available on the Defense Health Agency’s website, are being updated and that the final guidance will be issued shortly.
The announcement comes amid a wave of anti-transgender policies from both the DoD and the Trump-Vance administration, which continue to prohibit trans men from receiving the same treatment.
Under the forthcoming guidance, men ages 30 and older will be forced to undergo testosterone blood tests as part of their medical care. Younger male service members will be tested if they request screening or if clinicians identify warning signs of low testosterone.
The new guidelines formalize a screening program Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced in July, when he said the Pentagon would begin testing service members to ensure that “you have the right testosterone levels to operate at your absolute best.”
“Taking care of your long-term health means ensuring you remain strong, resilient, and capable — not just for your next deployment, but for the rest of your life, so you can thrive long after you take off the uniform,” Hegseth said at the time.
The Defense Health Agency’s clinical guidance says the program is intended to address “hormonal and energy-availability issues.” Hegseth said in July that testosterone replacement therapy would remain voluntary for service members if treatment is recommended.
The Food and Drug Administration is also scheduled to hold a meeting later this month with experts to discuss the medical use of testosterone.
The Pentagon’s push to routinely test testosterone levels runs counter to current medical guidance, which generally recommends considering testosterone therapy only for men who have symptoms consistent with low testosterone and have documented low hormone levels on two separate blood tests.
Testosterone is a sex hormone naturally produced by people of all sexes. It plays a role in regulating muscle mass, bone density, and sex drive. Testosterone levels in men naturally decline with age and have been associated with symptoms including erectile dysfunction, low libido, mood changes and weight gain, although experts continue to debate when testosterone therapy is medically appropriate.
The policy has drawn scrutiny from LGBTQ advocates because the Pentagon and Hegseth have simultaneously cited hormone therapy as part of the rationale for removing trans service members from the military.
Under President Donald Trump’s 2025 executive order, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” the military has moved to bar trans people diagnosed with gender dysphoria from serving and has begun formal administrative separation proceedings against trans personnel.
The Pentagon continues to pursue implementation of the trans military ban as litigation over the policy proceeds. As a result, some trans service members have had their gender-affirming hormone therapy halted even as the Pentagon expands testosterone screening and potential treatment for cisgender service members.
SPARTA Pride, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization made up of trans service members, veterans and their allies, criticized the disparity to the Washington Blade when Hegseth first announced the screening program.
“If hormone therapy helps warfighters perform at their best, then it cannot simultaneously be used as evidence that transgender service members are unfit to serve,” said Kara Corcoran, executive director of SPARTA Pride. “The same class of evidence-based medical treatment cannot be characterized as readiness-enhancing for one group and readiness-destroying for another.”
On June 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that trans service members already serving in the military could continue to do so while allowing the armed services to continue refusing to enlist new trans recruits.
The Blade reached out to the Pentagon when the testosterone screening program was first announced in July, asking why cisgender service members could receive testosterone therapy while transgender service members could not. The Pentagon did not respond.
National
Lou Chibbaro Jr. documentary wins award from NLGJA
‘Lou’s Legacy’ produced by D.C.’s Mattachine Society
“Lou’s Legacy: a Reporter’s Life at the Washington Blade,” a documentary produced by The Mattachine Society of Washington, D.C., will receive an Excellence in Journalism Award from NLGJA, the Association of LGBTQ+ Journalists.
The film premiered on WETA PBS in D.C. and Maryland Public Television (MPT) in June of 2025. The documentary’s Emmy-nominated director and producer Patrick Sammon will accept the award for Excellence in Local Television on Sept. 11 at NLGJA’s National Convention in San Francisco.
“Lou’s Legacy” was produced in association with the Mattachine Society of Washington, D.C., a non-profit LGBTQ history society dedicated to conducting original archival research. Aside from Sammon, the NLGJA is recognizing other members of the film’s production team including Producer Julianne Donofrio, Editor Amir Jaffer, Executive Producer Charles Francis, and Executive Producer Pate Felts.
“Lou’s Legacy” tells the story of two D.C. icons — legendary Washington Blade reporter Lou Chibbaro Jr. and beloved drag performer Donnell Robinson, known to generations of Washington audiences as “Ella Fitzgerald.” Through Lou’s nearly five-decade career at the Blade and Ella’s return to the stage after a three-year hiatus following COVID, the 29-minute documentary explores the history of Washington’s LGBTQ community and today’s rising backlash against LGBTQ rights, including laws targeting drag performers.
“All students of journalism can learn a lot from the story of Lou Chibbaro, Jr. Lou has chronicled nearly five decades of LGBTQ+ life and the community’s struggle for equality in Washington, D.C. Lou’s work and the role of the queer press has been essential in covering stories the mainstream media would often ignore or erase,” said Ryan Levi, president of the D.C. chapter of the NLGJA.
“We are thrilled to receive this award from the NLGJA,” said the film’s director Patrick Sammon. “Lou Chibbaro’s nearly five decade career at the Washington Blade demonstrates the essential role LGBTQ journalism plays in telling our community’s stories and documenting its history. This recognition from journalists who follow in Lou’s footsteps is particularly meaningful to me and the rest of our production team.”
Arizona
Shooting outside gay bar in Ariz. leaves three dead
Tucson police investigating double murder-suicide as a hate crime
Three people were fatally shot outside a gay bar in Tucson, Ariz., early Monday morning, about a mile from the city’s nightlife district.
Police have said the shooting, which took place in the parking lot of Venture-N bar at 1239 N. 6th Ave., was likely a hate crime and a double murder-suicide following a verbal altercation.
The suspect, Ousman Ceesay, allegedly shot Vincent Anthony Siqueiros and Cameron Davis Capara while they were outside the club around 12:30 a.m. Monday.
Reports show Capara and Siqueiros were pronounced dead at the scene. Ceesay died after being taken to a local hospital with gunshot wounds.
Police have also said that Ceesay was carrying a list of LGBTQ businesses at the time of the shooting.
Arizona Public Media has said police are investigating the case as a hate crime because the suspect was carrying a note containing the names of multiple LGBTQ-associated businesses.
“I am deeply saddened that another senseless loss of life has happened in our community,” Tucson Police Chief Monica Prieto said in a statement. “Bias-based crimes are especially heinous and have no place in our community.”
According to Prieto, there is no imminent threat to the community, and the Tucson Police Department is working to provide extra protection to various LGBTQ businesses across town.
Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva, who represents the area, issued a statement condemning the act of violence, which appears to have been at least in part motivated by homophobia.
“I am disgusted and deeply saddened to learn of a targeted act of hate and the cold-blooded murder of two members of our LGBTQIA+ community, Vincent Siqueiros and Cameron Capara, at the Venture-N bar in Tucson last night. This horrific attack is a painful reminder that even in welcoming communities like Tucson, hate and violence against the LGBTQIA+ community still exist.”
“When that hate is combined with easy access to firearms, the consequences can be deadly. I am sick and tired of Congress refusing to lift a finger to protect our communities while, every day, dozens of people are shot and killed across the country. It does not have to be this way. The House of Representatives is returning to session this week, and our first action should be passing common-sense gun safety reforms that we know can save lives.”
Other federal lawmakers also condemned the shooting.
The Congressional Equality Caucus, which is made up of federal legislators advancing LGBTQ interests, issued a statement after news broke.
“Our hearts are with the friends and loved ones of the victims of this devastating attack outside a Tucson gay bar and with the Tucson LGBTQI+ community,” it said on X. “No one should fear violence because of who they are — and we’re going to continue fighting to build a world where no one does.”
The Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ organization in the country, released a statement following the shooting.
“We are heartbroken by the loss of Vincent Anthony Siqueiros and Cameron Davis Capara and our hearts are with their families, loved ones, and the entire Tucson LGBTQ+ community. Once again, we are reminded that gun violence robs people of their lives, destroys families, and devastates communities.”
A candlelight vigil honoring the victims is planned for Sept. 2 at 6:30 p.m. at Catalina Park in North Tucson.
Pentagon expands testosterone screening as trans troops face hormone therapy restrictions
Calendar: September 4-10
Swiss government backs nationwide conversion therapy ban
Gloria Steinem dies at 92
The mastery of love
Immersive ‘Nation-State’ imagines a society free of authoritarianism
Poland begins to legally recognize same-sex marriages from other countries
HRC president campaigns for Chris Pappas in NH
We’re getting married but our parents object
Michael Smith could make history as Delaware’s first LGBTQ treasurer
-
Theater5 days agoImmersive ‘Nation-State’ imagines a society free of authoritarianism
-
Poland4 days ago
Poland begins to legally recognize same-sex marriages from other countries
-
Congress4 days ago
HRC president campaigns for Chris Pappas in NH
-
Advice4 days ago
We’re getting married but our parents object
