Connect with us

National

S.F. couple ‘elated’ over deferred deportation

USCIS allows Wells, Makk to stay together in country

Published

on

Anthony Makk and Bradford Wells (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Bradford Wells breathed a sigh of relief this week following the news that his Australian-native spouse, Anthony Makk, won’t be forced to leave the United States anytime soon.

“I’m absolutely elated,” Wells said. “The pressing issue of my family being destroyed has been dealt with for the time being.”

On Wednesday, Wells, 56, received a letter from U.S. Customs & Immigration Services that potential deportation action on Makk, 49, won’t happen for at least two years.

Wells said he received the news while watching the Republican presidential candidates on television and feeling discouraged by their anti-gay rhetoric when he received an unexpected phone call.

“It was Nancy Pelosi calling,” Wells said. “She called to tell me that the problem had been solved and Anthony had been given deferred action and that my family would be together. The deferred action was good for two years. That gave me such a feeling of joy and relief.”

Wells and Makk met with House Minority Leader Pelosi (D-Calif.) to discuss their situation in D.C. during an October meeting, according to The Advocate.

Makk said he was “over the moon happy” upon hearing about the deferred action because it means his efforts to stay in the United States haven’t been in vain.

“To be able to remain here legally has been important to us, and it always has been,” Makk said. “The fact that they don’t grant this [deferred action] to many people at all makes this even more special.”

Under current immigration law, straight Americans can sponsor their foreign spouses for residency in the United States through a marriage-based green card application, but the same option isn’t available to gay bi-national couples because the Defense of Marriage Act prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage.

Consequently, foreign nationals in same-sex marriages could be deported if they’re undocumented or upon the expiration of their green cards. Makk was in the United States from 2000 to 2010 under a business visa, but after his company shut down, he lost his visa status and faced separation from the country.

For Wells, the prospect of being separated from his spouse was distressing because he has AIDS and depends on his spouse for care.

“He helps me get through when things just seem too difficult for me to deal with,” Wells said. “Sometimes I get so sick, I can’t deal with them … I’ve been in a lot of pain lately, so walking has been very difficult. He helps me out with that.”

Wells and Makk became a high-profile case when the San Francisco Chronicle profiled them in July and reported on the U.S. Customs & Immigration Service’s decision to deny the couple a green card. Even though the couple was married in Massachusetts in 2004 and has been together 19 years, they were unable to receive a green card because of DOMA.

But the letter dated Jan. 4 from U.S. Customs & Immigration Services states that Makk has been granted temporary deferment and won’t have to worry about deportation for that period of time.

“This is to advise you that effective today, January 4, 2012, you have been granted deferred action for a period of two years,” the letter states. “This action will expire on January 3, 2014.”

The letter explains that the deferred action is the result of prosecutorial discretion being exercised by U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services, but doesn’t confer or alter any immigration status.

Still, the letter also states that as a person granted deferred action, Makk can apply for employment authorization in the United States. Additionally, he’s eligible for an extension of this deferred action beyond the two years that have already been allotted.

USCIS didn’t respond to the Washington Blade’s request for comment on why Wells and Makk were given deferred action in their case.

The decision falls within the scope of the prosecutorial discretion memo on deportations that the Department of Homeland Security issued in June. Additionally, the move is consistent with the Obama administration’s plan announced in August to take low-priority cases out of the deportation pipeline on a case-by-case basis.

Steve Ralls, a spokesperson for Immigration Equality, which is handling the Wells and Makk case, said the action marks the first time the administration has moved to protect a bi-national couple before the start of removal proceedings.

“For the first time, the federal government has intervened, prior to the initiation of removal proceedings, to grant real, tangible relief to a married bi-national couple,” Ralls said. “The decision to grant Anthony deferred action, which can be renewed beyond the initial two years if needed, is a welcome change from the uncertainty and threats of separation that have hung over this family, so and many others, in the past.”

In a statement, Pelosi called the deferred action a “positive resolution of Anthony’s immigration petition” and a “personal victory” for Makk and Wells.

“Anthony would have faced deportation because of the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, even though he has lived in the United States for more than 20 years, has no criminal history, has never lived here illegally and is the primary caregiver to his husband,” Pelosi said. “The Obama Administration’s recent efforts to prioritize immigration enforcement for the removal of criminals and others who pose a threat to national security helped pave the way for today’s good news.”

Pelosi wasn’t the only lawmaker who helped. Wells said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and gay State Sen. Mark Leno, who represents San Francisco in the California Legislature, also had roles in pressuring the U.S. government to allow his partner to remain in the United States.

Even though USCIS has taken action, Wells said he isn’t sure whether the remedy will be enough because Makk is unable to leave the country under his current status.

“”I know that Anthony cannot leave the country and come back,” Wells said. “That’s something that still worries me. If something should happen to a family member in Australia, if one of his relatives dies, or if one his relatives gets really sick, he will not be able to go back to his family there.”

Immigration Equality’s Ralls said the administration can take further action to protect other bi-national gay couples in similar situations to Wells and Makk.

“While the best solution remains a policy that would provide lesbian and gay spouses, just like straight spoues, an opportunity to obtain a green card, this action is significant nonetheless,” Ralls said. “Moving forward, it should be repeated for other couples until DOMA is repealed or UAFA is law.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

Report: Grenell wants Russian ambassadorship

Country’s anti-LGBTQ record a reported barrier

Published

on

Special envoy for “special missions” Richard Grenell speaks at the Log Cabin Republicans Big Tent Event in 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Richard Grenell, President Donald Trump’s special envoy for “special missions,” is making it known that he is interested in the Russian ambassadorship.

According to reporting by the Daily Mail, Grenell has “floated” his interest in the role to coworkers, but issues surrounding the former German ambassador’s sexuality have made securing the position more difficult.

“He had an interest in the job — or at least he floated the idea to select colleagues. But Putin’s regime is extremely anti–LGBTQ, so I’m sure they didn’t take that thought too seriously,” one source close to Grenell told the Daily Mail. “That would never happen anyway.”

Grenell has long been one of Trump’s closest allies and was the first openly gay person to hold a Cabinet-level position. He was ousted last month as acting director of the Kennedy Center, a position he had held since Trump reestablished the board to be composed of his political supporters in 2025.

In addition to leading the nation’s cultural arts center, Grenell previously served as the U.S. ambassador to Germany from 2018 to 2020, and as the special presidential envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations from 2019 to 2021. He was also a State Department spokesperson to the U.N. under the George W. Bush administration and a Fox News contributor.

Russia has a longstanding history of being anti-LGBTQ.

In 2013, the country passed a law banning any public endorsement of “nontraditional sexual relations” among minors. In December 2022, Putin signed legislation expanding the ban, making it illegal to promote same-sex relationships or suggest that non-heterosexual orientations are “normal” for people of any age, widening censorship across media and public life.

The Russian courts have also supported the restriction of LGBTQ identity in the country. In November 2023, Russia’s Supreme Court granted a request from the Justice Ministry to outlaw the “international LGBT movement” as “extremist,” allowing authorities to criminalize advocacy and potentially prosecute individuals for expressions of LGBTQ+ identity or support.

In addition to LGBTQ rights issues, the war between Russia and Ukraine has become a global concern. Ukraine, which was part of the former Soviet Union, includes the territory known as Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014. The annexation remains a major point of international dispute over sovereignty. Since 2022, Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine has escalated the conflict, drawing global attention and sanctions while straining U.S.-Russia relations.

The U.S. has spent $188 billion in total related to the war in Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February 2022, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The Russian ambassadorship seems to be a difficult role to fill, according to additional information presented by the Daily Mail. With Trump already being seen as relatively positive by Russian President Vladimir Putin, and with close ties to members of his Cabinet and family — like son-in-law Jared Kushner — the ambassadorship is complicated and viewed as less critical than in previous administrations.

“There is no rush to fill that role because it has now been deemed unnecessary,” another source told the U.K.-based publication.

Bob Foresman, a seasoned businessman with decades-long ties to the Kremlin, was reportedly once the frontrunner, according to the Daily Mail. Foresman served as vice chair of UBS Investment Bank and Deputy Chairman of Renaissance Capital between 2006 and 2009, and earlier led investment banking for Russia at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein from 1997 to 2000.

“This is a pattern, especially in the Trump administration — special envoys big–footing the ambassadors,” a source told the Daily Mail. “It is shocking that we are already in April and we don’t have an ambassador to one of the most important countries in the world.”

Continue Reading

Tennessee

Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill

State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday

Published

on

Tennessee, gay news, Washington Blade
Image of the transgender flag with the Tennessee flag in the shape of the state over it. (Image public domain)

The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.

House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.

The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”

It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.

HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.

The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.

This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.

Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.

It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”

State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.

“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”

Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.

“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”

The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:

“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”

Continue Reading

Iran

LGBTQ groups condemn Trump’s threat to destroy Iranian civilization

Ceasefire announced less than two hours before Tuesday deadline

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Council for Global Equality is among the groups that condemned President Donald Trump on Tuesday over his latest threats against Iran.

Trump in a Truth Social post said “a whole civilization will die tonight” if Tehran did not reach an agreement with the U.S. by 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday.

Iran is among the handful of countries in which consensual same-sex sexual relations remain punishable by death.

Israel and the U.S. on Feb. 28 launched airstrikes against Iran.

One of them killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran in response launched missiles and drones against Israel and other countries that include Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and Cyprus.

Gas prices in the U.S. and around the world continue to increase because the war has essentially closed the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway that connects the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s crude oil passes.

Trump less than 90 minutes before his deadline announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran that Pakistan helped broker.

“We the undersigned human rights, humanitarian, civil liberties, faith-based and environmental organizations, think tanks and experts are deeply alarmed by President Trump’s threat regarding Iran that ‘a whole civilization will die tonight’ if his demands are not met. Such language describes a grave atrocity if carried out,” reads the statement that the Council for Global Equality more than 200 other organizations and human rights experts signed. “A threat to wipe out ‘a whole civilization’ may amount to a threat of genocide. Genocide is a crime defined by the Genocide Convention and by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as committing one or more of several acts ‘with intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, racial or religious groups as such.'”

The statement states “the law is clear that civilians must not be targeted, and they must also be protected from indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks.”

“Strikes on civilian infrastructure — such as the recent attack on a bridge and the attacks President Trump is repeatedly threatening to carry out to destroy power plants — have devastating consequences for the civilian population and environment,” it reads.

“We urge all parties to respect international law,” adds the statement. “Those responsible for atrocities, including crimes against humanity and war crimes, can and must be held accountable.”

The Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice, Amnesty International USA, Human Rights Watch, the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP, MADRE, and the Robert and Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center are among the other groups that signed the letter.

Continue Reading

Popular