National
Texas Supreme Court rules against benefits for same-sex couples
Says state workers have no right to obtain benefits for gay spouses
Supreme Court of Texas has ruled no established right exists for extending benefits to same-sex couples. (Photo public domain)
Despite the U.S. Supreme Court extending marriage equality nationwide — and a recent declaration from justices affirming that decision — the Texas Supreme Court on Friday ruled against spousal benefits for married same-sex couples.
Writing for the court, Justice Jeffrey Boyd determined the 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges “is not the end” on the same-sex marriage issue and state workers have no established right to obtain benefits, such as health insurance, for their same-sex spouses in the same way as other employees.
“The Supreme Court held in Obergefell that the Constitution requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriages to the same extent that they license and recognize opposite-sex marriages, but it did not hold that states must provide the same publicly funded benefits to all married persons, and — unlike the Fifth Circuit in De Leon — it did not hold that the Texas DOMAs are unconstitutional,” Boyd writes.
The 24-page ruling instructs a trial court — which had determined prior to the Obergefell ruling the state need not afford benefits to married same-sex couples — to re-examine the issue under the guidance that the DeLeon decision, a federal case that overturned the Texas same-sex marriage ban, doesn’t bind the court.
“We hold that the Fifth Circuit’s decision in De Leon does not bind the trial court on remand, and the trial court is not required to conduct its proceedings ‘consistent with’ that case,” Boyd writes.
Further, the Texas Supreme Court reverses the judgment of the Texas 14th Court of Appeals that overturned the trial court’s decision.
The case was filed by Jack Pidgeon and Larry Hicks after former Houston Mayor Annise Parker, a lesbian, instructed her city to provide spousal benefits to city employees in same-sex marriages after the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling against the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act. Jack Pidgeon and Larry Hicks contended state law, which at the time barred same-sex marriage, prevented Parker from taking that action.
The Texas Supreme Court decision seems to fall short of outright denying spousal benefits for married same-sex couples and instead remands the case to a trial court for reconsideration of the issue. The Texas Supreme Court also vacates the trial court’s decision barring Houston from granting spousal benefits.
The court’s ruling comes in the same week the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in Pavan v. Smith affirming marriage equality nationwide, overturning an Arkansas Supreme Court decision upholding a state law against placing both lesbian parents’ names on the birth certificates of their children.
Boyd writes the Pavan decision demonstrates “the Supreme Court has taken one opportunity to address Obergefell’s impact on an issue it did not address in Obergefell, and there will undoubtedly be others.”
That’s incorrect. The U.S. Supreme Court took up the case only after the Arkansas Supreme Court issued the ruling contrary to to the Obergefell decision. The U.S. Supreme Court also said Obergefell explicitly addressed the birth certificate issue, citing plaintiffs who were seeking to place their names on their children’s birth certificates. The Obergefell ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded, guarantees same-sex couples the constellation of benefits under marriage.
Boyd also notes the U.S. Supreme Court elected to take up the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, which involves a bakery refusing to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. But that review will address whether the First Amendment grants the right for businesses to refuse services to same-sex couples, not whether the government can deny same-sex benefits.
Kenneth Upton Jr., senior counsel in Lambda Legal’s Dallas-based South Central Regional Office, said the Texas Supreme Court decision is similarly contrary to the principles of the Obergefell ruling.
“This absurd contortion of the Obergefell ruling defies all logic and reason, especially in light of the Supreme Court’s explicit ruling on Monday that marriage is marriage and equal is equal,” Upton said. “We will take steps to protect these families.”
Eric Lesh, fair courts project director at Lambda Legal, said the ruling from the Texas Supreme Court — which is made up of justices who are elected rather than appointed — demonstrates a judiciary made up of elected justices is inadequate.
“This decision is political and is an example of why elected judges are bad for LGBT people and bad for judicial independence,” Lesh said.
Also condemning the Texas Supreme Court was GLAAD CEO Sarah Kate Ellis, who said the ruling demonstrates marriage equality isn’t safe.
“The Texas Supreme Court’s decision this morning is a warning shot to all LGBTQ Americans that the war on marriage equality is ever-evolving, and anti-LGBTQ activists will do anything possible to discriminate against our families,” Ellis said. “In the age of the Trump administration, which continues to systematically erase LGBTQ Americans from the fabric of this nation, the LGBTQ community and our allies must remain visible and push back harder than ever against attacks on acceptance.”
Federal Government
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams
In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”
The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.
“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”
Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”
Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”
“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”
Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.
Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.
The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition
On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”
New York
Zohran Mamdani participates in NYC Pride parade
Mayoral candidate has detailed LGBTQ rights platform
Zohran Mamdani, the candidate for mayor of New York City who pulled a surprise victory in the primary contest last week, walked in the city’s Pride parade on Sunday.
The Democratic Socialist and New York State Assembly member published photos on social media with New York Attorney General Letitia James, telling followers it was “a joy to march in NYC Pride with the people’s champ” and to “see so many friends on this gorgeous day.”
“Happy Pride NYC,” he wrote, adding a rainbow emoji.
Mamdani’s platform includes a detailed plan for LGBTQ people who “across the United States are facing an increasingly hostile political environment.”
His campaign website explains: “New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people, but private institutions in our own city have already started capitulating to Trump’s assault on trans rights.
“Meanwhile, the cost of living crisis confronting working class people across the city hits the LGBTQIA+ community particularly hard, with higher rates of unemployment and homelessness than the rest of the city.”
“The Mamdani administration will protect LGBTQIA+ New Yorkers by expanding and protecting gender-affirming care citywide, making NYC an LGBTQIA+ sanctuary city, and creating the Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs.”
Can we still celebrate Fourth of July this year?
Ritchie Torres says he is unlikely to run for NY governor
GenOUT Chorus offers solace, strength to LGBTQ teens
Is it time for DC to have new congressional representation?
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
Spanberger touts equality, reproductive rights in Arlington
Two new books on dining out LGBTQ-style
‘Andy Warhol in Iran’ a charming look at intersection of art, politics
Pragmatic presidents invest in America
