National
Cain indicates support for Federal Marriage Amendment
GOP front-runner abandons position that issue should be left to states
Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain has indicated he now backs a U.S. constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage throughout the country — marking a change from his previously stated position that the issue should be left to the states.
The current front-runner in the race to win the GOP presidential nomination said he supports federal action to deny marriage rights to gay couples in an interview published Sunday with the conservative Christian Broadcasting Network.
Asked by political reporter David Brody if he backs a U.S. constitutional amendment against marriage equality, Cain said backs federal action because of efforts to undo the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 anti-gay law that prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The Obama administration has stopped defending the statute against litigation in court.
“I think marriage should be protected at the federal level also,” Cain said. “I used to believe that it could be just handled by the states but there’s a movement going on to basically take the teeth out of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, and that could cause an unraveling.”
Cain continued, “So we do need some protection at the federal level because of that and so, yes, I would support legislation that would say that it’s between a man and a woman.”
In the same interview, Cain said he backs a U.S. constitutional amendment that would overturn Roe v. Wade, a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that made abortion rights constitutionally protected throughout the country. He said he would sign the amendment, although constitutional amendments don’t go to the president, but to the states for ratification.
Cain made the comments as he continues to enjoy strong support in national polls and polls in Iowa, the first state that will hold a caucus or primary in the election season. According to a University of Iowa poll published last week of likely caucus-goers, Cain was the choice of 37 percent of respondents. Coming in second was former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who was favored by 27 percent of responders.
The pizza magnate’s remarks on marriage signify a change in the position that he held as recently as last week when he said he wouldn’t seek a Federal Marriage Amendment and believes the issue should be left to the states.
During an appearance last week on the NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Cain said,“I wouldn’t seek a constitutional ban for same sex marriage, but I am pro-traditional marriage.”
Asked by host David Gregory whether states should decide the issue for themselves, Cain replied, “They would make up their own minds, yes.”
But Cain’s new position is on par with the position he held in 2004 when he was running to represent Georgia in the U.S. Senate. After the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, Cain issued a statement condemning the decision and calling for a Federal Marriage Amendment.
“The courts have failed the American people,” Cain said at the time. “Congress needs to enact a constitutional amendment to protect the sacred institution of marriage.”
Cain continued, “Liberal-minded judges have opened a floodgate of judicial tyranny that will chip away at the core values of this country until nothing sacred is left! It started with not allowing prayer in schools, not being able to display the Ten Commandments, attempting to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance and now making same-sex marriages legal.”
The change in positions for Cain over recent years had made him the brunt of attacks from both LGBT advocates and as well as Republican presidential candidates seeking to oust him from his position as GOP front-runner.
Fred Sainz, vice president of communications for the Human Rights Campaign, said Cain “flip-flops more than the pizzas he used to cook” and said his remarks demonstrate a misunderstanding of the legislative process.
“In less than ten years, he’s had three positions on this issue,” Sainz said. “It’s hard to believe which Herman Cain is speaking. With respect to his answer to this question, Cain continues to confuse the role of the president in this process. The president would have no role in a constitutional amendment to ban marriage; it would be up to Congress and the states.”
Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann, who represents a district in Minnesota in the U.S. House, also attacked Cain on FOX News Sunday for being inconsistent.
“You can’t have all of these flip-flops in our nominee, one after another, and it’s making the voters’ heads spin,” Bachmann said. “I think it’s giving people pause, and they’re asking real questions about, what does he believe, truly, and how would he govern as president of the United States And that’s non-negotiable.”
Cain’s most recent remarks raises questions because he never explicitly mentions the Federal Marriage Amendment, but instead makes vague comments about federal action. Cain said he backs “legislation” to address the issue, which is different from an amendment. The video in which Cain makes the remarks is also apparently edited during the portion that he makes the comments.
The Cain campaign didn’t immediately respond to the Washington Blade’s request to clarify the candidate’s position.
Chris Barron, board chair of GOProud, said the kind of federal action that Cain is seeking with regard to marriage isn’t clear in his remarks during the interview.
“Honestly it’s not clear from his response,” Barron said. “He is indicating he is for some additional federal approach but unclear what.”
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS
A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.
The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.
The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”
The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.
Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.
The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.
The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.
Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.
“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.
Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.
“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.
The Washington Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.
While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.
“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”
He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.
“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”
“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”
Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.
“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”
She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.
“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”
National
Results from key Tuesday primary races
State officials in California had not called the governor’s race as of Wednesday morning but Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra appear likely to advance to the general election.
The race for governor has been scrambled several times after Kamala Harris opted not to run, Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out after sexual misconduct allegations surfaced, and Rep. Katie Porter’s campaign fizzled. Becerra would be the state’s first Latino governor since 1875 if elected. Hilton was endorsed by President Trump.
In the Los Angeles mayor’s race, the AP declared that incumbent Mayor Karen Bass will advance to the Nov. 3 runoff while former reality TV star Spencer Pratt and LA Council member Nithya Raman were competing for second place. California is notoriously slow in counting ballots and only about half of the results were available by Wednesday morning.
In San Francisco, Democratic State Sen. Scott Wiener advanced to the general election in November, besting Supervisor Connie Chan, who was endorsed by House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi is retiring from Congress after nearly 40 years in the House.
In Iowa, Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek won the primary for an open U.S. Senate seat, defeating state Sen. Zach Wahls. Turek will face Rep. Ashley Hinson, who won the GOP primary with President Donald Trump’s endorsement, in the general election.
The Iowa seat is open because Sen. Joni Ernst (R) decided not to seek re-election. The primary was closely watched by LGBTQ advocates because Wahls rose to national prominence after a speech he made defending marriage equality went viral in 2011. Wahls was raised by a lesbian couple.
National
White House Correspondents’ Dinner rescheduled after shooting
‘We will not allow an act of violence to have the last word’
The White House Correspondents’ Association announced on Tuesday that it has rescheduled its annual dinner for July 24 after the April event was halted when gunshots rang out at the Washington Hilton.
Cole Allen, 31, is charged with the attempted assassination of President Trump, who was in the ballroom at the time of the incident. One Secret Service officer was wounded in the attack. Officers stopped Allen before he could enter the ballroom where 2,500 journalists and politicos were having dinner and waiting for Trump to speak. It was Trump’s first time attending as president.
“We will not allow an act of violence to have the last word, especially during a year when we are reflecting on the 250th anniversary of America and everything we stand for,” said WHCA President Weijia Jiang in a statement to members.
She did not announce further details, including venue and ticketing.
Washington Blade White House reporter Joe Reberkenny was in the audience when shots were fired and reported live on social media from the scene.
This post will be updated as more details are announced.
D.C. Latinx Pride celebrates culture and heritage
Fighting ‘Rainbow Panic’ in museums
A vice president marches by our side
Leaving for a barge trip through canals of Burgundy
Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops
Time travelers from the AIDS era
Books for a pre-Pride celebration
Barney Frank’s powerful legacy for LGBTQ federal employees
Claudia López comes up short in Colombian presidential election
