Connect with us

National

Plaintiffs seek to expedite gay troops’ case against DOMA

Attorneys want earlier deadline, narrower focus

Published

on

SLDN advocates rally in favor of 'Don't Ask' repeal late in 2010 prior to the vote. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Attorneys representing gay troops in a lawsuit contesting the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act are asking the court to impose an earlier deadline for House Republicans to intervene in the case.

In a motion dated April 11, plaintiffs ask the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts to shorten the deadline to April 20 for the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group to respond to the case. As it stands, the current deadline for House Republicans to intervene is April 28.

“To help expedite the case and narrow the issues for trial, plaintiffs ask that the court set an April 20, 2012 deadline for potential intervenors to seek intervention in this case,” the motion states.

The lawsuit, McLaughlin v. United States, was filed by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network before the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts in October on behalf of gay troops seeking benefits for their spouses. Chadbourne & Parke LLP is serving as pro-bono counsel in the case.

Plaintiffs say they are seeking an earlier deadline in the case because they want to resolve issues of intervention before a decision is reached in the DOMA cases pending before the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Oral arguments took place in those cases April 4.

“The plaintiffs hope that this case will move quickly once the First Circuit rules in those cases,” the motion states. “Accordingly, plaintiffs would like the court to set an earlier deadline for any third-parties to intervene, so that any issues concerning whether intervention should be permitted can be addressed and decided prior to the First Circuit’s decision in Massachusetts and Gill.”

David McKean, SLDN’s legal director, said the filing was made to speed up the process.

“This filing today was made in order to help expedite the case and resolve issues surrounding BLAG’s intervention sooner rather than later,” McKean said.

Attorneys representing BLAG didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the request to shorten the deadline.

The Obama administration last year stopped defending DOMA in court, but the House, under the direction of Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) took up defense of the law after BLAG voted on a 3-2 party line basis to defend the statute in the administration’s stead. Boehner’s attorneys are expected to intervene in the McLaughlin case as they’ve done with other cases.

Christopher Man, counsel at Chadbourne & Parke LLC, told the Blade on March 10 BLAG was likely to intervene soon in the lawsuit, but that intervention has yet to take place. According to the motion, attorneys for BLAG advised plaintiffs on March 7 that intervention would take place in the “next day or so.”

In a letter dated Feb. 17, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder notified Congress the administration won’t defend other statutes barring spousal benefits from flowing to gay troops, such as Title 38, in addition to DOMA. The letter created the opportunity for Boehner’s attorney to respond to the case.

The parties involved in the case previously agreed to move the deadline from intervention from Feb. 28 to April 28. But that agreement was made before oral arguments took place in the two DOMA cases before the First Circuit Court of Appeals.

The McLaughlin case isn’t the only pending litigation against DOMA in which the plaintiffs are gay troops seeking spousal benefits. On Feb. 1, the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit in a California federal court on behalf of Tracey Cooper-Harris, a lesbian veteran seeking benefits for her spouse. Boehner’s attorneys intervened last month against plaintiffs in the case.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

House Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill

Measures would restrict federal funding for LGBTQ-affirming schools

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Republicans have been gaining ground in reshaping education policy to be less inclusive toward LGBTQ students at the state level, and now they are turning their focus to Capitol Hill.

Some GOP lawmakers are pushing for a nationwide “Don’t Say Gay” bill, doubling down on their commitment to being the party of “traditional family values” by excluding anyone who does not identify with their sex at birth.

The largest anti-LGBTQ education legislation to reach the House chamber is House Bill 2616 — the Parental Rights Over the Education and Care of Their Kids Act, or the PROTECT Kids Act. The PROTECT Kids Act, proposed by U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), and co-sponsored by U.S. Reps. Burgess Owens (R-Utah), Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Robert Onder (R-Mo.), and Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), would require any public elementary and middle schools that receive federal funding to require parental consent to change a child’s gender expression in school.

The bill, which was discussed during Tuesday’s House Rules Committee hearing, would specifically require any schools that get federal money from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 — which was created to minimize financial discrepancies in education for low-income students — to get parental approval before identifying any child’s gender identity as anything other than what was provided to the school initially. This includes getting approval before allowing children to use their preferred locker room or bathroom.

It reads that any school receiving this funding “shall obtain parental consent before changing a covered student’s (1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or (2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.”

LGBTQ rights advocates have criticized both national and state efforts to require parental permission to use a child’s preferred gender identity, as it raises issues of at-home safety — especially if the home is not LGBTQ-affirming — and could lead to the outing of transgender or gender-curious students.

A follow-up bill, HB 2617, proposed by Owens, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, prevents the use of federal funding to “advance concepts related to gender ideology,” using the definition from President Donald Trump’s 2025 Executive Order 14168, making that an enshrined definition in law of sex rather than just by executive order. There is also a bill making its way through the senate with the same text— Senate Bill 2251.

Advocates have also criticized this follow-up legislation, as it would restrict school staff — including teachers and counselors — from acknowledging trans students’ identities or providing any support. They have said that this kind of isolation can worsen mental health outcomes for LGBTQ youth and allows for education to be politicized rather than being based in reality.

David Stacy, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president of government affairs, called this legislation out for using LGBTQ children as political pawns in an ideology fight — one that could greatly harm the safety of these children if passed.

“Trans kids are not a political agenda — they are students who deserve safety and affirmation at school like anyone else,” Stacy said in a statement. “Despite the many pressing issues facing our nation, House Republicans continue their bizarre obsession with trans people. H.R. 2616 does not protect children. It targets them. This bill is cruel, and we’re prepared to fight it.”

This is similar to Florida House Bills 1557 and 1069, referred to as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill and “Don’t Say They” bill, respectively, restricting classroom discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity, prohibiting the use of pronouns consistent with one’s gender identity, expanding book banning procedures, and censoring health curriculum.

The American Civil Liberties Union is tracking 233 bills related to restricting student and educator rights in the U.S.

Continue Reading

National

BREAKING NEWS: Shots fired at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Shooter reportedly opened fire inside hotel

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Joe Reberkenny)

Four loud bangs were heard in the International Ballroom of the Washington Hilton during the annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner on Saturday.

According to the Associated Press, a shooter opened fire inside the hotel outside the ballroom.

Attendees could hear four loud bangs as people started to duck and take cover. During the chaos sounds of salad and glasses were dropped as hotel employees, and guests ducked for cover.

The head table — which included President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, first lady Melania Trump, and White House Correspondents Association President Weijia Jiang — were rushed off stage.

“The U.S. Secret Service, in coordination with the Metropolitan Police Department, is investigating a shooting incident near the main magnetometer screening area at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner,” the U.S. Secret Service said in a statement. “The president and the First Lady are safe along all protects. One individual is in custody. The condition of those involved is not yet known, and law enforcement is actively assessing the situation.”

Trump held a press conference at the White House after he left the hotel.

“A man charged a security checkpoint armed with multiple weapons and he was taken down by some very brave members of Secret Service,” said Trump.

Trump said the shooter is from California. He also said an officer was shot, but said his bullet proof vest “saved” him.

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, interim D.C. police chief Jeffrey Carroll, U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro, and other officials held their own press conference at the hotel.

Carroll said the gunman who has been identified as Cole Tomas Allen was armed with a shotgun, handgun, and “multiple” knives when he charged a Secret Service checkpoint in a hotel lobby. Carroll also told reporters that law enforcement “exchanged gunfire with that individual.”

Both he and Bowser said the gunman appeared to act alone.

“We are so very thankful to members of law enforcement who did their jobs tonight and made sure all guests were safe,” said Bowser. “Nobody else was involved.”

The Washington Blade will update this story as details become more available.

Continue Reading

State Department

State Department implements anti-trans bathroom policy

Memo notes directive corresponds with White House executive order

Published

on

(Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress)

The State Department on April 20 announced employees cannot use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.

The Daily Signal, a conservative news website, reported the State Department announced the new policy in a memo titled “Updates Regarding Biological Sex and Intimate Spaces, Including Restrooms.”

The State Department has not responded to the Washington Blade’s request for comment on the directive.

“The administration affirms that there are two sexes — male and female — and that federal facilities should operate on this objective and longstanding basis to ensure consistency, privacy, and safety in shared spaces,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggot told the Daily Signal. “In line with President Trump’s executive order this provides clear, uniform guidance to the department by grounding policy in biological sex as determined at birth.”

President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. The sweeping directive also ordered federal government agencies to “effectuate this policy by taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity.”

The Daily Signal notes the new State Department policy “does not prohibit single-occupancy restrooms.”

Continue Reading

Popular