Local
Md. House debating marriage
Final vote set for Friday; more heated debate expected
The Maryland House of Delegates began floor debate on the marriage equality bill at 11 a.m. Friday. The atmosphere in the chamber is tense amid speculation that there are only 69 or 70 votes — 71 are required for passage.
So far this morning, several Republicans have taken to the floor to denounce the bill, including Del. Emmett Burns who claims his life has been threatened due to his opposition.
The Blade will update this page as developments warrant.
PREVIOUS COVERAGE:
A bill to allow same-sex couples to marry survived an attempt to kill or weaken it through amendments in the Maryland House of Delegates on Wednesday and was expected to come up for a final vote Friday.
The amendments were introduced during the opening round of debate in the chamber on the Civil Marriage Protection Act. A vote on the bill was initially set for Thursday, but House Speaker Michael Busch (D-Anne Arundel County) moved it back to Friday as supporters scrambled to line up the 71 votes needed for passage.
“I feel very confident that we’re going to get to 71,” said Del. Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City), one of seven openly gay members of the House of Delegates.
Others following the bill have expressed concern that support in the House began to erode after the Senate passed the measure last month and Gov. Martin O’Malley reiterated his commitment to sign it.
Del. Heather Mizuer (D-Montgomery County), a lesbian, said the defeat by supporters of four hostile amendments during Wednesday morning’s opening round was a good sign because it showed supporters had the strength to stop attempts to derail the bill. But she cautioned that more amendments were expected during Friday’s session.
Del. Aisha Braveboy (D-Prince George’s County) introduced what backers of the bill considered the most threatening of the proposed amendments.
Saying she wanted to ensure that voters rather than lawmakers have the final say on the issue, Braveboy said her amendment would accomplish that by converting the marriage bill into a proposed state constitutional amendment calling for legalizing same-sex marriage. Maryland’s constitution requires that all proposed amendments to the constitution be placed before voters in a referendum.
Supporters of the marriage bill, led by Del. Kathleen Dumais (D-Montgomery County), the vice chair of the House Judiciary Committee which has jurisdiction over the bill, noted that a vote by the House to convert the bill into a constitutional amendment would send it back to committee. With most observers believing support for such a constitutional amendment is lacking in the committee, Dumais and other backers of the marriage bill said Braveboy’s amendment would effectively kill the bill.
The amendment was defeated by a roll-call vote of 72 to 63.
Among those voting for it were Delegates Jill Carter (D-Baltimore City) and Tiffany Alston (D-Prince George’s County), two of three original co-sponsors of the marriage bill who stunned supporters last week by announcing they were considering withdrawing their support.
Del. Sam Arora (D-Montgomery County), who joined Carter and Alston in saying he was about to withdraw his support for the bill, changed his mind following a firestorm of criticism from residents of his district. He issued a statement last week saying he would vote for the bill in committee and on the House floor, with the expectation that voters would have the final say in an expected referendum, which he favors.
Arora voted against the Braveboy amendment on Wednesday but voted for another amendment calling for allowing private social services agencies to refuse to provide adoption, foster care or other services if providing such services “would violate the entity’s religious beliefs.”
Although the amendment did not specifically mention gay adoptions, LGBT activists said they believed it was aimed at using the marriage equality bill as a vehicle for weakening the state’s existing adoption policies. The existing polices prohibit adoption agencies from discriminating against same-sex couples or gay or lesbian single parents seeking to adopt if they meet the same eligibility requirements as heterosexuals seeking to adopt.
The adoption related amendment, introduced by Del. John Donoghue (D-Washington County), lost by a vote of 79 to 58. Alston voted for the amendment; Carter voted against it.
An amendment introduced by Del. Kathryn Afzali (R-Frederick County) called for allowing parents of public school children to excuse a child from attending classes or instruction “involving materials that promote same-sex marriage.” The amendment also called for allowing a teacher to decline to teach such a class or materials.
Afzali and others supporting the amendment argued that teachers and parents should be given the right to opt out of such classes or instructional programs if same-sex marriage is contrary to their religious or moral beliefs.
Similar to her arguments against the adoption amendment, Dumais said curriculum related policies for the public schools were not germane to a marriage equality bill and should be left to locally elected school boards or the state’s education department to decide.
The amendment lost by a vote of 86 to 54, with Alston, Carter and Arora voting against it.
The fourth amendment targeting the marriage bill, introduced by Del. Andrew Serafini (R-Washington County) called for changing the bill’s name from the Civil Marriage Protection Act to the “Same-Sex Marriage Act.” Serafini said his proposed name was a more accurate description of what the bill would do.
The amendment was defeated by a vote of 85 to 52. Alston voted for it, Arora voted against it, and Carter did not cast a vote on the amendment.
District of Columbia
Mary’s House founder, CEO retires
Dr. Imani Woody played leading role in opening DC’s first home for LGBTQ seniors
The board of directors for Mary’s House for Older Adults, DC’s first official home dedicated to providing affordable housing for LGBTQ seniors, announced on July 7 that its founding president and CEO, Dr. Imani Woody, has retired.
Woody, who holds a PhD in Human Services, is credited with playing a leading role over many years in arranging both city and private funding needed to construct and operate the Mary’s House three-story building located at 401 Anacostia Road, S.E., in the city’s Fort Dupont neighborhood.
The house, which opened in March 2025, with a grand opening ceremony held in May 2025, includes 15 single-occupancy residential units and more than 5,000 square feet of shared communal living space.
“It is with profound gratitude and hearts full of celebration that the board of directors of Mary’s House for Older Adults, DC (MHFOA) announces the retirement of our visionary founder, Dr. Imani Woody, from her role as president and CEO,” the Mary’s House board says in a statement.
“Dr. Woody’s journey with Mary’s House began with her vision and a kitchen table gathering of women with a bold, urgent, and loving vision: to create safe, affirming, affordable housing for LGBTQ/SGL older adults in Washington, DC,” the statement says.
It adds, “What started as a dream has grown into DC’s first affordable LGBTQ+/SGL affirming communal living space for adults 60 and over, a 15-room community residence at 401 Anacostia Road in Southeast Washington.”
The statement says Woody will continue to serve on Mary’s House board.
“The board will be sharing information about the leadership transition process in the coming weeks,” the statement continues. “We are committed to honoring Dr. Woody’s legacy by ensuring Mary’s House continues to thrive and grow in faithful service to LGBTQ/SGL elders experiencing housing insecurity and isolation.”
Maryland
Va., Md., advocates brace for next fight after Supreme Court sports ruling
Neither state has statewide ban on trans student athletes
On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for states to enforce laws barring transgender students from participating on school sports teams consistent with their gender identity, a decision LGBTQ advocates say could encourage additional restrictions across the country.
While neither Maryland nor Virginia currently has a statewide ban on trans student athletes, advocates say the decision could reshape future legislative battles and school policies throughout the region.
Directly following the case, attorneys for trans student athletes spoke out about the case and how detrimental it could be to students.
“This ruling is deeply harmful for transgender women and girls who only asked for the ability to participate in sports with their peers,” said Sasha Buchert, senior attorney and director of the Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project for Lambda Legal, in a press release from the American Civil Liberties Union.
The next step is figuring out how states will move forward, specifically in Maryland and Virginia.
As of right now, neither state has bans on trans athletes in schools. The new Supreme Court decision also does not require states to enact bans, only that bans are allowed if states or school districts choose to enforce them.
According to the ACLU, 27 states have banned trans youth from participating in school sports since 2020. Most of these states also require sex testing, which the organization says is invasive for all female athletes.
Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman said that while she has heard a lot of frustration following the decision, people are ready to take action.
“Families, parents and youth have lived through disappointing changes to the Virginia Department of Education’s model policies for the treatment of transgender students, and the Virginia High School League’s decades-old policy that allowed transgender students an opportunity to play sports with their friends,” Rahaman said in a statement to the Washington Blade.
She believes they are not ready to give up this fight quite yet.
As of now, trans and nonbinary students are protected under Virginia law, and Rahaman wants that to continue.
“This ruling will likely embolden right-wing members of the General Assembly to pursue trans athlete bans, and we will continue to defeat every bill like we have the past five legislative sessions. Now is our time to be proactive,” Rahaman said.
She also calls upon Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger to defend trans youth in Virginia from what she describes as bullies and to continue to stand up to federal attacks on the trans community in general.
For trans students, Rahaman wants to ensure that they continue to know that they belong and have a place in school sports.
“To the transgender young people watching this decision unfold: you belong on your team, in your school, in your community, and here in Virginia. This ruling does not change that. A single Supreme Court decision cannot define your worth or your future,” Rahaman said.
For people who may be outside the community but want to help, she encourages them to speak with trans and nonbinary people in their community, befriend the families of youth to show their support, and continue to speak up on these issues when needed.
According to ACLU of Virginia, high schooler Eliza Munshi was told she could not compete on the girls’ track team because she was trans. To prove a point, she decided to compete with the boys.
She had previously competed on the girls’s track team before her Virginia school decided to enforce the ban demanded by President Donald Trump. With pink hair and pink makeup, she decided to continue her love for the sport alongside boys. According to Munshi, her entire community rallied for her.
“I did it to prove a point. I knew I could do it. I knew it wouldn’t phase me. My gender itself and that label has been the least important part of my transition: I want to look how I want to look. I want to dress how I want to dress. If you don’t like that, then that’s not my business,” Munshi said.
DOE has launched Title IX probe against Md. school districts
In the weeks leading up to the ruling, multiple Maryland school districts were included in a Title IX probe stating that not enforcing sex-based protections guaranteed by federal law. Currently, there have been no updates on the lawsuit or the district’s decisions.
According to the U.S. Department of Education, the federal probe is based on parent complaints that the school districts were violating a specific Trump-Vance administration addition to Title IX, stating it aligned the sex-based protections “with biological reality, not ideological fantasy.”
According to FreeState Justice, an LGBTQ advocacy group in Maryland, while this is a disappointing ruling to see, they will continue to fight for trans student-athletes in Maryland and want trans youth to know that they belong.
“Every young person deserves the opportunity to participate in school and community life without being singled out because of who they are. These decisions send a harmful message to transgender youth that they are somehow less deserving of that opportunity,” said Phillip Westry, the group’s executive director.
Westry wants to make sure the community knows that their commitment to the organization has not changed and will continue to provide the same legal services they have prior and to advance policy solutions, to ensure “every LGBTQ+ Marylander can live with dignity, safety, and equal opportunity.”
Another issue brought up by trans advocates is the issue of testing women to determine whether they are biologically female or not.
According to Human Rights Watch, as of 2023, World Athletics required cis women with increased testosterone levels to undergo medical procedures to have it reduced to avoid advantages. Other forms of “sex verification” may include genetic testing, screenings of an athlete’s anatomy or chromosomes.
However, this can become detrimental because not all women have ovaries, a uterus, or XX chromosomes, meaning cisgender women could potentially be included in these bans, depending on how the specific state plans to enforce them.
Maryland
Eastern Shore school board wants an 18-and-over rule for young adult books
Classics like ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ and ‘Little Women’ might be off limits to most students
By LIZ BOWIE | Somerset County’s school board is considering barring students under the age of 18 from reading any young-adult literature in school libraries, essentially restricting all but 12th graders from checking out books written for teens and tweens.
The proposed policy also calls for the superintendent to discipline librarians if “adult” reading material appears in the children’s section.
The policy defines young adult as students over 18. “Young adults are not minors and books suitable for young adults shall be placed on a separate Young Adults library section to reflect age-appropriate literature,” a draft of the policy says.
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Former Fla. gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum arrested on drug charges
Dutch prime minister scheduled to open World Pride human rights conference
Philadelphia murder suspect remains at large
Mary’s House founder, CEO retires
Va., Md., advocates brace for next fight after Supreme Court sports ruling
‘My Favorite Sociopath’ debuts at Shepherdstown’s CATF
Under-the-radar Delaware beach towns smart buyers are targeting
In Trump’s divided America, Michael Weinstein’s AHF responds
When a church fears the rainbow
