Connect with us

National

More scrutiny of Obama’s marriage views

President insists it’s a state issue

Published

on

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

President Obama’s position on marriage equality came under renewed scrutiny Monday during a press briefing at the White House when press secretary Jay Carney was asked about California’s Proposition 8, which overturned marriage rights for same-sex couples in 2008.

A Wall Street Journal reporter asked if Obama’s belief that marriage should be left to the states means California voters should decide for themselves whether or not to legalize same-sex marriage.

“I’m not disagreeing with that interpretation,” Carney said. “But he has said quite clearly, as he did with the [Defense of Marriage Act] decision, and as he did on Thursday that he believes that it’s for the states to decide.”

On Thursday — one day before New York legalized same-sex marriage —Obama reiterated his view that marriage is a state issue during an LGBT fundraiser in New York City.

In June 2008, the Alice B. Toklas Club in San Francisco announced that it had received a letter from then-Democratic presidential candidate Obama reading, “And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.”

Asked to clarify Carney’s comments on Monday, Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, replied, “The president has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples and believes strongly in stopping efforts designed to take rights away. That is why he opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment and Proposition 8.”

After voters approved Prop 8 and state litigation seeking to overturn the ban failed, the American Foundation for Equal Rights filed a federal lawsuit challenging the marriage ban. Last year, a U.S. district court in San Francisco determined that Proposition 8 violated the U.S. Constitution. The lawsuit is on appeal, so the fate of Prop 8 remains unknown. Some advocates say Obama’s position on marriage could have an impact on how courts examine the issue.

Carney was cautious about saying more about the president’s position on the marriage ban and maintained that Obama “very strongly supports equal rights.”

“I’m not going to put words into his mouth applying to another state,” Carney said. “You can analyze that because I haven’t heard him say that. But obviously, the DOMA decision, what he said in New York is about his belief — our belief that this is a matter the states should decide.”

In February, Obama announced that he would no longer defend DOMA in court because he believes the statute is unconstitutional. At the fundraiser on Thursday, Obama indicated he believes DOMA is unconstitutional because it interferes with a state’s right to regulate marriage.

Later, during the briefing, the issue of same-sex marriage emerged again when reporter Bill Press asked how the president can square his belief that marriage should be left to the states while at the same time saying he believes same-sex couples deserves the same rights as opposite-sex couples.

“Well, look, I’m not going to — the president has made his position clear,” Carney replied. “It’s not very useful for us to have this debate. I think the president spoke about this on Thursday, he’s spoken about it — sorry — a number of times in the past.”

Pressed further on whether Obama has “missed an opportunity” to endorse same-sex marriage prior to New York’s decision to legalize gay nuptials, Carney replied, “Again, the president — the president’s record on issues involving and of concern to the LGBT community is exemplary and we are very proud of it. He continues to fight on behalf of that community for the rights, for equal rights, and his position on New York, he, himself, rather than his press secretary, spoke at length about just a few nights ago.”

Obama has held various positions on same-sex marriage. In 1996, when running to become an Illinois state senator, Obama in a questionnaire response to what is now the Windy City Times wrote, “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

But during his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama said he believes marriage is between one man and one woman and backed civil unions for gay couples. Since October, Obama has suggested he could evolve on the marriage issue, but he has yet to endorse gay nuptials.

A partial transcript of the exchange between reporters and Carney during the White House news briefing follows:

Wall Street Journal: …Does that mean he also respects the outcome of democracy at work in California where voters decided to reject the idea of gay marriage?

Jay Carney: I think as you saw in the decision we announced … this administration would no longer be participants defending the Defense of Marriage Act because we don’t believe it’s constitutional. That is precisely because of his belief that this a matter that needs to be decided by the states. So without commenting on a particular other state, I think we’ve been making that clear with regard to the action in New York. …

I’m not going to put words into his mouth applying to another state. You can analyze that because I haven’t heard him say that. But obviously, the DOMA decision, what he said in New York is about his belief — our belief that this is a matter the states should decide.

Journal: And the central argument in the challenge to Proposition 8 by supporters of same-sex marriage rights is that this isn’t something that should be decided state-by-state, but there are federal rights involved —

Carney: The president very strongly supports equal rights and he’s made that clear as well, and he said it again in New York at the event that we’re discussing. …

I don’t really have a lot I can say about Proposition 8 with regards to what the president said last week. I’m not willing to go to what the president didn’t discuss. I can talk about we he did discuss.

Journal: But the proper reading of what he said — it sounds what you’re saying, and I want to be clear, is that, yes, this is up to the states, and if New York decides that they want to allow same-sex marriage, great, if California decides that they don’t want to, then that’s their decision as well.

Carney: Well, yeah, I can’t improve upon the words that the president delivered publicly — whatever night that was — Thursday night. I’m not disagreeing with that interpretation. But he has said quite clearly, as he did with the DOMA decision, and as he did on Thursday that he believes that it’s for the states to decide.

Bill Press: I want to come back to the same-sex marriage issue, if I can. If the opportunity to enjoy the same right as same-sex couples as straight couples is a basic civil right, how can you square that with saying we leave it up to the states?

Carney: Well, look, I’m not going to — the president has made his position clear. It’s not very useful for us to have this debate. I think the president spoke about this on Thursday, he’s spoke about it — sorry — a number of times in the past. So, you can take it to other places, but I think …

Press: But let me ask this, with New York being the largest state so far to recognize same-sex marriage, are you concerned that the president have missed his opportunity to lead on this issue?

Carney: Again, the president — the president’s record on issues involving and of concern to the LGBT community is exemplary and we are very proud of it. He continues to fight on behalf of that community for the rights, for equal rights, and his position on New York, he, himself, rather than his press secretary, spoke at length about just a few nights ago.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

DOJ seeks to dismiss some claims in gay FBI employee’s bias lawsuit

David Maltinsky was fired after displaying Pride flag at desk

Published

on

A gay FBI trainee was fired after displaying a Pride flag at his desk. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Attorneys for gay former FBI employee David Maltinsky, who was fired from his job as a non-agent employee at the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office in October 2025 after more than 16 years of service for displaying an LGBTQ Pride flag at his workstation, filed court papers on July 15 opposing a motion by government attorneys to dismiss some but not all of the provisions in his unlawful discrimination lawsuit seeking to overturn the firing.

Maltinsky’s lawsuit, filed in federal court in D.C. on Nov. 19, 2025, states that FBI Director Kash Patel acted illegally by violating Maltinsky’s First Amendment constitutional rights and the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 by ordering his firing on grounds that he “exercised poor judgement with an inappropriate display of political signage” by displaying the Pride flag.

The firing came at a time when Maltinsky successfully completed 16 weeks of the FBI’s 19-week training program at the FBI training academy in Quantico, Va. to become an FBI Special Agent, according to the lawsuit.

In addition to Patel, who took office as FBI director in February 2025 under the Trump administration, the lawsuit names as defendants the FBI itself, Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, and the U.S. Department of Justice, which oversees the FBI.

“Defendants discriminated against Maltinsky for engaging in protected speech, for his sexual orientation, and for opposing discrimination – a clear and brazen violation of federal law and the Constitution,” the lawsuit states in an amended complaint filed May 5, 2026.

The Department of Justice, which is representing the FBI in its response to the lawsuit, did not immediately respond to a request from the Washington Blade for comment on the lawsuit and why it is seeking dismissal of some but not all of the lawsuit’s multiple allegations, including its claim that the firing violated Maltinsky’s First Amendment rights.

In its “Partial” motion filed on June 15, 2026, to dismiss some provisions in the lawsuit, the Justice Department through Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate and Associate Branch Director Christopher Hall, stated that the lawsuit fails to provide sufficient evidence that Maltinsky was fired because he is gay.    

“The Amended Complaint contains no factual allegations that Director Patel or any other decisionmaker expressed hostility toward gay employees, relied on Plaintiff’s sexual orientation in making employment decisions, even knew Plaintiff’s sexual orientation or otherwise indicated that Plaintiff’s status as a gay man played any role in the challenged actions,” the motion states.

Based on that, among other things, the motion says the lawsuit’s claim that the firing violated the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be dismissed. A 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision ruled that the 1964 law bans employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity along with its other categories including race, religion, and gender.  

In its arguments that the decision to fire Maltinsky was illegal, unconstitutional, and unjust, the lawsuit’s amended complaint points out that FBI officials at the Los Angeles Field Office where Maltinsky worked presented the Pride flag to him and gave him full permission to display it at his workstation.  

“The FBI encouraged and honored Maltinsky’s work by awarding him the 2020 Director’s Award For Excellence-Outstanding Service in Diversity and Inclusion,” the lawsuit says. “In 2022, the Attorney General for the Department of Justice awarded Maltinsky the Attorney General’s Award for Equal Employment Opportunity, DOJ’s highest award for performance in support of the Equal Employment Program,” it says.

“In special recognition of Maltinsky’s efforts to improve the FBI, in June 2021 LAFO [Los Angeles Field Office] leadership entrusted to Maltinsky two Pride flags that had been flown from the flagpole located in front of the LAFO,” the lawsuit complaint continues. “Maltinsky displayed one of those flags at his workstation.”

Although the lawsuit doesn’t say so directly, all of that happened during the administration of President Joe Biden and previous FBI Director Christopher Wray, who held the director’s position from August 2017 to January 2025, when Donald Trump took office as president.

Nathaniel Zelinsky, one of the attorneys representing Maltinsky regarding the lawsuit, told the Blade that because the Justice Department did not contest the lawsuit’s First Amendment provisions, the case will move forward to the discovery stage, in which he and fellow attorneys can seek and obtain government documents, and most likely go to trial. He said that regardless of whether the judge approves the dismissal of the lawsuit provisions the government has asked for, the other provisions and the case as a whole  will continue.

“And those First Amendment claims are extremely serious,” he said. “The government, by its admission, fired David Maltinsky because they did not like the speech he displayed when he put up the Pride flag that was gifted to him by the FBI,” Zelinsky said. “The federal government cannot discriminate against its workers based on their speech.”      

Continue Reading

North Carolina

Authorities investigate officer-involved shooting outside Asheville gay bar

Incident took place near Shakey’s on Wednesday

Published

on

(Photo by chalabala/Bigstock)

An officer-involved shooting outside of a gay dive bar, Shakey’s, in downtown Asheville, N.C., left one man dead Wednesday.

The bar released a statement the following morning regarding the incident, stating that bar staff had asked a patron to leave earlier in the night citing concerning behavior. The bar said that later the man was spotted with a gun in the parking lot.

The bar proceeded to call 911, locked the doors to the establishment, and followed dispatcher instructions on how to keep patrons of the bar safe while officers arrived. These protocols included getting patrons away from the windows and staying low to the ground.

According to Shakey’s, shots were fired outside of the business. When the Asheville Police Department officers arrived, they fired back. The individual died from their injuries, according to the police.

“Because of everyone’s quick actions, cooperation, and concern for one another, every customer and every employee inside Shakey’s made it home safely. We are incredibly thankful,” Shakey’s said on their Instagram page. They thanked Asheville police, emergency dispatchers, EMS, and all first responders who were on scene.

On Thursday, a spokesperson for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation, Chad Flowers, stated that the suspect involved in the shooting was Arturo Castillo Palomar.

The Washington Blade reached out to the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation for a comment regarding the possibility of the event being considered a hate crime. They said the issue is currently under investigation and that the findings would be turned over to the district attorney for review.

Continue Reading

Pentagon

Hegseth announces testosterone initiative as trans troop ban continues

SPARTA Pride criticized Pentagon policy

Published

on

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. military will begin testing and treating service members with hormone therapy despite banning similar medical care for transgender service members.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that troops ages 30 and older will be subject to annual testosterone screenings, while younger service members will have the option to voluntarily opt in. Some troops may then be recommended for hormone therapy, he explained in a video posted to social media.

“Under the supervision of our world-class medical professionals, warfighters age 30 and older are going to be tested annually as part of their periodic health assessment,” Hegseth said in a video posted to X, captioned “The High-T Department of War.”

This push to test testosterone levels, as the hormone is commonly referred to as “T,” runs counter to current medical guidelines. Physicians are generally advised to discuss testosterone therapy only with men who have symptoms consistent with low testosterone and documented low hormone levels on two separate blood tests.

Testosterone is a vital sex hormone that all humans naturally produce. It helps regulate muscle mass, bone density, and sex drive. In men, it is primarily produced in the testicles, while in women it is produced in the ovaries and adrenal glands.

Natural testosterone levels in men decline with age and have long been associated with issues such as erectile dysfunction, low libido, mood changes, and weight gain. However, experts continue to debate whether these conditions should routinely be treated with testosterone therapy.

Hegseth’s announcement aligns with other actions taken by the Trump-Vance administration — including efforts by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — to make testosterone therapy more accessible for men, particularly those assigned male at birth.

Last month, the Food and Drug Administration proposed easing prescribing restrictions on testosterone gels, pills, patches, and injections following a December advisory panel that recommended reducing regulatory hurdles to expand access to testosterone therapy.

Currently, FDA labeling specifies that these medications are approved only for men with hypogonadism, a medical condition that causes abnormally low testosterone levels.

The announcement came as a shock to many LGBTQ advocates because Hegseth and the Defense Department have cited the use of hormone therapy by trans service members as justification for their dismissal under President Donald Trump’s 2025 executive order, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness.

The Pentagon continues to pursue implementation of the trans military ban as litigation proceeds. As a result, many trans service members have had their gender-affirming medical care halted, even as similar hormone therapy is now being expanded for cisgender service members. Under the executive order, the military currently disqualifies individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria and has begun formal administrative separation proceedings for trans personnel.

SPARTA Pride, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization made up of trans service members, veterans, and their allies, issued a statement to the Washington Blade following Hegseth’s announcement.

“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.”

The legal fight over trans military service remains ongoing.

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 to ask why cisgender service members could receive hormone therapy while trans service members could not, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Continue Reading

Popular