National
More scrutiny of Obama’s marriage views
President insists it’s a state issue
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.
Federal Government
Gay Venezuelan man ‘forcibly disappeared’ to El Salvador files claim against White House
Andry Hernández Romero had asked for asylum in US
A gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who the U.S. “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador has filed a claim against the federal government.
Immigrant Defenders Law Center, who represents Andry Hernández Romero, on Friday announced their client and five other Venezuelans who the Trump-Vance administration “forcibly removed” to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, filed “administrative claims” under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
The White House on Feb. 20, 2025, designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”
President Donald Trump less than a month later invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The White House then “forcibly removed” Hernández, who had been pursuing his asylum case in the U.S., and more than 250 other Venezuelans to El Salvador.
Immigrant Defenders Law Center disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.
Hernández was held at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT, until his release on July 18, 2025. Hernández, who is back in Venezuela, claims he suffered physical and sexual abuse while at CECOT.
“As a Venezuelan citizen with no criminal record anywhere in the world, I would like to tell not only the government of the United States but governments everywhere that no human being is illegal,” said Hernández in the Immigrant Defenders Law Center press release. “The practice of judging whole communities for the wrongdoing of a single individual must end. Governments should use their power to help every person in the nation become more aware and informed, to strengthen our cultures and build a stronger generation with principles and values — one that multiplies the positive instead of destroying unfulfilled dreams and opportunities.”
Immigrant Defenders Law Center filed claims on behalf of Hernández and the five other Venezuelans less than three months after American forces seized then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, at their home in Caracas, the Venezuelan capital.
Maduro and Flores have pleaded not guilty to federal drug charges. Delcy Rodríguez, who was Maduro’s vice president, is Venezuela’s acting president.
‘Due process and accountability cannot be optional’
Immigrant Defenders Law Center on Friday also made the following demands:
- The Trump administration must officially release the names of all people the United States sent to CECOT to ensure that everyone has been or will be released.
- The federal government must clear the names of the 252 men wrongfully labeled as criminal gang members of Tren de Aragua.
- DHS (Department of Homeland Security) must end the practice of outsourcing torture through third‑country removals, restore humanitarian parole, and rebuild a functioning, humane asylum system.
- DHS must reinstate Temporary Protected Status for all individuals who cannot safely return to their home countries, halt mass deportations and unlawful raids and arrests, and guarantee due process for everyone navigating the immigration system.
- Congress must pass the Neighbors Not Enemies Act, which would repeal the Alien Enemies Act.
“In all my years as an immigration attorney, I have never seen a client simply vanish in the middle of their case with no explanation,” said Immigration Defenders Legal Fund Legal Services Director Melissa Shepard. “In court, the government couldn’t even explain where he was — he had been disappeared.”
“When the government detains and transfers people in secrecy, without transparency or access to the courts, it tears at the basic protections a democracy is supposed to guarantee,” added Shepard. “What this experience makes painfully clear is that due process and accountability cannot be optional. They are the only safeguards standing between people and the kind of lawlessness our clients suffered. We must end third country transfers, restore the asylum system, and humanitarian parole, and reinstate temporary protective status so this nightmare never happens again.”
The White House
Trump proclamation targets trans rights as State Dept. shifts visa policy
Recent policy actions from the White House limit transgender rights in sports, immigration visas, and overarching federal policy.
In a proclamation issued by the Trump White House Thursday night, the president said he would, among other things, “restore public safety” and continue “upholding the rule of law,” while promoting policies that restrict the rights of transgender people.
“We are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written, and ensuring colleges preserve — and, where possible, expand — scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes,” the proclamation reads. “At the same time, we are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”
The statement comes amid a broader series of actions by the Trump administration targeting transgender people across multiple federal policy areas, including education, health care, and immigration. A nearly complete list of policies the current administration has put forward can be found on KFF.org.
One day before the proclamation was issued, the U.S. State Department announced changes to visa regulations that could impact transgender and gender-nonconforming people seeking entry into the United States.
The policy, published March 11 and scheduled to take effect April 10, introduces changes to the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, commonly known as the “DV Program.” The rule is framed by the department as an effort to strengthen oversight and prevent fraud within the visa lottery system, which allocates a limited number of immigrant visas annually to applicants from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States.
However, the updated language also standardizes the use of the term “sex” in federal regulations in place of “gender,” a change that LGBTQ advocates say could create additional barriers for transgender and gender-diverse applicants.
The policy states: “The Department of State (‘Department’) is amending regulations governing the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program (‘DV Program’) to improve the integrity of, and combat fraud in, the program. These amendments require a petitioner to the DV Program to provide valid, unexpired passport information and to upload a scan of the biographic and signature page in the electronic entry form or otherwise indicate that he or she is exempt from this requirement. Additionally, the Department is standardizing and amending its regulations to add the word ‘shall’ to simplify guidance for consular officers; ensure the use of the term ‘sex’ in lieu of ‘gender’; and replace the term ‘age’ in the DV Program regulations with the phrase ‘date of birth’ to accurately reflect the information collected and maintained by the Department during the immigrant visa process.”
Advocates say the shift toward using “sex” rather than “gender” in federal immigration rules reflects a broader push by the administration to roll back recognition of transgender identities in federal policy.
According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, an estimated 15,000 to 50,000 undocumented transgender immigrants currently live in the United States, with many entering the country to seek refuge from persecution and hostile governments in their home countries.
Florida
Fla. House passes ‘Anti-Diversity’ bill
Measure could open door to overturning local LGBTQ rights protections
The Florida House of Representatives on March 10 voted 77-37 to approve an “Anti-Diversity in Local Government” bill that opponents have called an extreme and sweeping measure that, among other things, could overturn local LGBTQ rights protections.
The House vote came six days after the Florida Senate voted 25-11 to pass the same bill, opening the way to send it to Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, who supports the bill and has said he would sign it into law.
Equality Florida, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy organization that opposed the legislation, issued a statement saying the bill “would ban, repeal, and defund any local government programming, policy, or activity that provides ‘preferential treatment or special benefits’ or is designed or implemented with respect to race, color, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”
The statement added that the bill would also threaten city and county officials with removal from office “for activities vaguely labeled as DEI,” with only limited exceptions.
“Written in broad and ambiguous language, the bill is the most extreme of its kind in the country, creating confusion and fear for local governments that recognize LGBTQ residents and other communities that contribute to strength and vibrancy of Florida cities,” the group said in a separate statement released on March 10.
The Miami Herald reports that state Sen. Clay Yarborough (R-Jacksonville), the lead sponsor of the bill in the Senate, said he added language to the bill that would allow the city of Orlando to continue to support the Pulse nightclub memorial, a site honoring 49 mostly LGBTQ people killed in the 2016 mass shooting at the LGBTQ nightclub.
But the Equality Florida statement expresses concern that the bill can be used to target LGBTQ programs and protections.
“Debate over the bill made expressly clear that LGBTQ people were a central target of the legislation,” the group’s statement says. “The public record, the bill sponsors’ own statements, and hours of legislative debate revealed the animus driving the effort to pressure local governments into pulling back from recognizing or resourcing programs targeting LGBTQ residents and other historically marginalized communities,” the statement says.
But the statement also notes that following outspoken requests by local officials, sponsors of the bill agreed to several amendments “ensuring local governments can continue to permit Pride festivals, even while navigating new restrictions on supporting or promoting them.”
The statement adds, “Florida’s LGBTQ community knows all too well how to fight back against unjust laws. Just as we did, following the passage of Florida’s notorious ‘Don’t Say Gay or Trans’ law, we will fight every step of the way to limit the impact of this legislation, including in the courts.”

